Why, do you think, animals suffer?

[nemmark]

Hmm… it seems almost impossible to logically prove something these days concerning belief systems, religions, philosophies, etc… I urge everyone to concider this saying:

you can beat someone over the head with logic all you want, but you will never succeed in touching their heart.

I also urge everyone to simply reflect upon their lives, especially if they have totally casted away their faith because of a problematic philisophical question such as: “why do animals suffer”, and see if their previously, currently, possibly future held beleifs in God are Truthfully good. This is a simple question to ask yourself, and I beleive that their is only one answer out of the two possible definite answers. Although I beleive this, and it is proclaimed to be true in my Catholic faith, I simply can’t give others truth by pressing logical arguments upon them.

This thread seems to have deviated from exploring why animals suffer to arguing the existance of God. This is not only unhealthy for many people who are already struggling with doubts over suffering, but it is not beneficial for beleivers and non-beleivers alike. It appears that it will be banned soon if this continues.

Let’s face it, philosophy, science, and religion all make us question our lives, our physical surroundings, and our societal systems. They all seek truth, but in different areas. Science seeks truth through examination of our physical world through our physical senses, while religion and philosophy seek truth and wisdom through studying human behavior, societal behavior, and reflecting inward (trying to connect with God through prayer). In the words of John Paul II, truth cannot contradict truth, but in my own words, we are not the absolute measures of truth, nor can we create or destroy it.

Take for example (for proclaimed athiests) a system like that of the universe, but put us on a sensual/intellectual level that is equal to that of a fish. We probably wouldn’t recognize the third dimension, nor would we conceive other dimensions in our mind. Unless we are trulely capable of sensing and perceiving everything in the universe, then even through science, philosophy, and religion we can’t even come close to knowing, let alone understanding everything. This for me, as a very logical thinker, has been reasonable enough to conceive a God who is so much higher than us, and other beings as well that we can’t even perceive with our senses. Scientific discoveries in physics and mathematics even give evidence of unseen/unperceivable dimensions within our universe that we commonly are part of (just like we’re part of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd dimension all at once). This is the last piece of logic I will use to beat people over the head with, because I’m simply straining myself.

It deeply troubles me when I can’t comprehend things, and my mind can go wild thinking about things, but I know my life will not be full unless I trust God. I’ve come so close to God that I can’t conceive a life without Him; He fulfills everything, and I mean everything. I see pain and misery in the world, and am hurt deeply by people who actively try to contradict what I understand to be good. I respect their views, but I know I cannot change them, just myself in dealing with them.

So, as Socrates tried to do in the time of ancient Greece, seek wisdom. No one is wise, and ultimately, we know nothing that we have not truly experienced. Examine our lives, see what is obviously good, and stamp out what is obviously wrong. Try communicating with God (He won’t let you down, trust Him). You won’t be duped, nor will you be disappointed in giving God, who is Love itself, a chance. You will probably find that religion, belief in God, Catholicism is very good and extremely beneficial for yourself and those around you. God love you, and may peace be with you all

 

[tonyrey]

Hmm… it seems almost impossible to logically prove something these days concerning belief systems, religions, philosophies, etc… I urge everyone to concider this saying:

you can beat someone over the head with logic all you want, but you will never succeed in touching their heart.

I also urge everyone to simply reflect upon their lives, especially if they have totally cast away their faith because of a problematic philosophical question such as: “why do animals suffer”, and see if their previously, currently, possibly future held beliefs in God are Truthfully good. This is a simple question to ask yourself, and I believe that their is only one answer out of the two possible definite answers. Although I believe this, and it is proclaimed to be true in my Catholic faith, I simply can’t give others truth by pressing logical arguments upon them.

This thread seems to have deviated from exploring why animals suffer to arguing the existence of God. This is not only unhealthy for many people who are already struggling with doubts over suffering, but it is not beneficial for believers and non-believers alike. It appears that it will be banned soon if this continues.

Let’s face it, philosophy, science, and religion all make us question our lives, our physical surroundings, and our societal systems. They all seek truth, but in different areas. Science seeks truth through examination of our physical world through our physical senses, while religion and philosophy seek truth and wisdom through studying human behavior, societal behavior, and reflecting inward (trying to connect with God through prayer). In the words of John Paul II, truth cannot contradict truth, but in my own words, we are not the absolute measures of truth, nor can we create or destroy it.

Take for example (for proclaimed athiests) a system like that of the universe, but put us on a sensual/intellectual level that is equal to that of a fish. We probably wouldn’t recognize the third dimension, nor would we conceive other dimensions in our mind. Unless we are truly capable of sensing and perceiving everything in the universe, then even through science, philosophy, and religion we can’t even come close to knowing, let alone understanding everything. This for me, as a very logical thinker, has been reasonable enough to conceive a God who is so much higher than us, and other beings as well that we can’t even perceive with our senses. Scientific discoveries in physics and mathematics even give evidence of unseen/unperceivable dimensions within our universe that we commonly are part of (just like we’re part of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd dimension all at once). This is the last piece of logic I will use to beat people over the head with, because I’m simply straining myself.

It deeply troubles me when I can’t comprehend things, and my mind can go wild thinking about things, but I know my life will not be full unless I trust God. I’ve come so close to God that I can’t conceive a life without Him; He fulfills everything, and I mean everything. I see pain and misery in the world, and am hurt deeply by people who actively try to contradict what I understand to be good. I respect their views, but I know I cannot change them, just myself in dealing with them.

So, as Socrates tried to do in the time of ancient Greece, seek wisdom. No one is wise, and ultimately, we know nothing that we have not truly experienced. Examine our lives, see what is obviously good, and stamp out what is obviously wrong. Try communicating with God (He won’t let you down, trust Him). You won’t be duped, nor will you be disappointed in giving God, who is Love itself, a chance. You will probably find that religion, belief in God, Catholicism is very good and extremely beneficial for yourself and those around you. God love you, and may peace be with you all

Welcome to the forum!

An excellent post but it is important to realise that on this forum people will contradict what you understand to be good and you should not be hurt by their opinions. Philosophy is not for the fainthearted!

 

[LittleSoldier]

1. Do you believe the pain of childbirth is a valid argument against the value and beauty of bringing a child into the world?

Absolutely not.

1. Do you believe the pain of childbirth is a valid argument against the belief that God designed and created the universe?

Absolutely not.

But I still have a very strong aversion to pain, even when it is worth going through.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I should add that it is only pampered women who regard the pain of childbirth as a valid argument against the value and beauty of childbirth. It is regarded as a natural event in most societies. Men have to suffer in other ways because their work often entails being more exposed to danger and accidents than being at home. The aversion to pain is a symptom of an unrealistic hedonistic mentality which puts pleasure and freedom from hardship at the top of one’s scale of values - as if we can have everything for nothing…

I believe I misread part of your post and I apologize for that. Your use of the phrase “pampered women” is confusing to me. Of course the pain of childbirth is not a valid argument against the value and beauty of childbirth, nor is it a valid argument against the love of God.

In some societies childbirth is not considered painful at all. One of the reasons it is so painful in “modern” societies is that the procedure is done for the comfort and ease of the obstetrician - not the woman giving birth. She lies supine on a bed, with her feet in stirrups and her legs spread wide apart so that the obstetrician can easily pull the baby out. She may be told that, no matter what, she is NOT to “push” and this is because the obstetrician is not ready (even though the mother obviously is). In some other societies women squat and use gravity. The procedures are changing in “modern” society; I hope they are improving.

I don’t think that aversion to pain “is a symptom of an unrealistic hedonistic mentality which puts pleasure and freedom from hardship at the top of one’s scale of values.” Aversion to pain is innate. Except for masochistic individuals (of whom I claim absolutely no understanding), pain is something which should warn us that something might be wrong. Neuropathy in diabetics can cut off that warning and the diabetic who is not careful may end up having a foot or part of a leg amputated. Pain is a gift from God and, like all His gifts, should be respected and used correctly.

Women suffer through childbirth. Yet the memory of that pain is usually repressed and the joy in one’s child can overcome much. That is one reason why women usually have more than one child. The pain is worth it! Yes, it is beautiful and wonderful to be able to carry one of God’s lambs within oneself and to participate in the birth of that lamb. It is beyond description.

However, if I ever again have to go through that procedure which is more painful than childbirth, I will have to be sedated and tied down because if I am not I will fight with all my strength to stop it.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Welcome to the forum!

An excellent post but it is important to realise that on this forum people will contradict what you understand to be good and you should not be hurt by their opinions. Philosophy is not for the fainthearted!

Did you actually correct that poster’s spelling?

 

[tonyrey]

Did you actually correct that poster’s spelling?

I suggested two improvements!

 

[LittleSoldier]

I suggested two improvements!

You red-lined his post. You changed his words. I’ve never seen anyone do that before. It could be taken the wrong way. It may even be against forum rules. I know your intent is good but, gee, I don’t even know what to say.

Please don’t do that to me.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Tell this to any person who is suffering to the extent that they wish to end their life. Tell them where the value of their life is, if they can’t experience it.

I have been in that situation and to be honest, I saw no value in my life at that time. All I wanted was for the pain to stop. NOW.

And that is honest and true. I have learned since then. I’ve learned that the pain does not last forever and that, as I understand the pain, I need to fight for the rights of people who are in agonizing pain, so that they are allowed to legally make use of a certain plant which is illegal in the US on a federal level, though legal in my state.

No, suffering is not an inevitable consequence of sentience in a world over which an omnipotent god presides. Sentience only affords the potential for suffering, given conditions that cause said suffering; said conditions are not inevitable in a world over which an omnipotent, loving god presides - nothing is inevitable if that is the case. That is why the existence of suffering is such a good argument against the existence of the God of Classical Theism.

It may not be an inevitable consequence but it is a consequence in this world. An omnipotent, omniscient, loving God can very well allow suffering to occur - God Incarnate Himself underwent horrible suffering and He allowed His own mother to watch His suffering which in turn caused her immense emotional/mental suffering.

But an omnipotent, omniscient, loving God will set everything right.

The following is only my opinion:

In Heaven there is no suffering and those that have suffered are given some sort of
recompense for their suffering. Their suffering on earth is transformed into a reward in Heaven. Suffering for God’s sake is a type of martyrdom and is certainly rewarded by God.

I don’t see it as a good argument. God resides over earth but His home is Heaven and there is no suffering there.

 

[tonyrey]

You red-lined his post. You changed his words.

 

[tonyrey]

I believe I misread part of your post and I apologize for that. Your use of the phrase “pampered women” is confusing to me. Of course the pain of childbirth is not a valid argument against the value and beauty of childbirth, nor is it a valid argument against the love of God.

In some societies childbirth is not considered painful at all. One of the reasons it is so painful in “modern” societies is that the procedure is done for the comfort and ease of the obstetrician - not the woman giving birth. She lies supine on a bed, with her feet in stirrups and her legs spread wide apart so that the obstetrician can easily pull the baby out. She may be told that, no matter what, she is NOT to “push” and this is because the obstetrician is not ready (even though the mother obviously is). In some other societies women squat and use gravity. The procedures are changing in “modern” society; I hope they are improving.

I don’t think that aversion to pain “is a symptom of an unrealistic hedonistic mentality which puts pleasure and freedom from hardship at the top of one’s scale of values.” Aversion to pain is innate. Except for masochistic individuals (of whom I claim absolutely no understanding), pain is something which should warn us that something might be wrong. Neuropathy in diabetics can cut off that warning and the diabetic who is not careful may end up having a foot or part of a leg amputated. Pain is a gift from God and, like all His gifts, should be respected and used correctly.

Women suffer through childbirth. Yet the memory of that pain is usually repressed and the joy in one’s child can overcome much. That is one reason why women usually have more than one child. The pain is worth it! Yes, it is beautiful and wonderful to be able to carry one of God’s lambs within oneself and to participate in the birth of that lamb. It is beyond description.

However, if I ever again have to go through that procedure which is more painful than childbirth, I will have to be sedated and tied down because if I am not I will fight with all my strength to stop it.

I’m glad you understand the context of my statement. Of course mothers suffer a great deal but fathers also share their suffering. Often it is worse to feel helpless and unable to do anything to alleviate another person’s agony. It is a form of mental torture…

I lived for fifteen years in Africa where women are so much more relaxed and almsot take having babies “in their stride” but life is so much harder with the heat, dust, torrential rain, mosquitoes, malaria and dysentery… Pain is a daily event without the millions of pills consumed in the West and consequently people are much tougher with their mud huts full of smoke and nothing but mats on the floor and a few cooking utensils. Life in the raw does have its advantages - if you survive!

 

[LittleSoldier]

I did not change his words or alter the meaning of his sentence.

I have often seen errors of spelling, grammar and punctuation pointed out verbally. I may be mistaken but I think it is less obtrusive and less humiliating to do so discretely.

How?

Do you know a rule which prohibits helping people?
Then the answer is to say nothing and leave the moderators to decide whether I am at fault…
Do you believe mistakes should **never **be corrected as a matter of principle? How would you justify that?

Let’s drop it, OK? I didn’t report it. It didn’t appear to bother the poster whose quote you changed. It would bother me. Someone once tried to humiliate me with a misspelling in my signature with the “[sic]” and everything and said he was very careful “because my signature is promulgated…” I had to look up the word “promulgated.” He was very nasty to me. Yeah, I spelled a word incorrectly. Shoot me. But I’ve had much worse happen to me in the past - a poster actually changed what I had said and inserted his own comments without even using a different color. He presented them as my comments and actually had me appear to insult myself! I guess since then I get a little upset when I see anything changed. Sorry.

There’s much more important stuff to discuss. I guess I’m a little thin-skinned because of my experiences.

 

[tonyrey]

Let’s drop it, OK? I didn’t report it. It didn’t appear to bother the poster whose quote you changed. It would bother me. Someone once tried to humiliate me with a misspelling in my signature with the “[sic]” and everything and said he was very careful “because my signature is promulgated…” I had to look up the word “promulgated.” He was very nasty to me. Yeah, I spelled a word incorrectly. Shoot me. But I’ve had much worse happen to me in the past - a poster actually changed what I had said and inserted his own comments without even using a different color. He presented them as my comments and actually had me appear to insult myself! I guess since then I get a little upset when I see anything changed. Sorry.

There’s much more important stuff to discuss. I guess I’m a little thin-skinned because of my experiences.

I sympathise - and admire you because you’ve had a tough life yet are remarkable positive!

I’m so used to dealing with aggressive atheists I sometimes counterattack too ferociously. Mea culpa.

 

[nemmark]

It’s ok if anyone corrects me, I’m just a person and I make mistakes, and I learn from the correction of my mistakes, even if they’re spelling related.

 

[tonyrey]

It’s ok if anyone corrects me, I’m just a person and I make mistakes, and I learn from the correction of my mistakes, even if they’re spelling related.

Thanks for your post. We all make mistakes and I’m delighted when some one points out mine - but then I used to be a teacher/lecturer and habits die hard!

God bless

 

[Sair]

“Anything is possible” is a simplistic definition of omnipotence.

So what exactly does omnipotence entail, if not the ability to do anything logically possible? You have certainly not demonstrated that it is logically impossible for a physical universe to be devoid of suffering - merely asserted that it is so. After all, when mere human beings, with gene-splicing technology, can create animals that glow in the dark, why should it be in any way difficult for an all-powerful god to create animals that can photosynthesise?

A false dilemma. No one is compelled to live for a year in unbearable torment.
Unlike you I don’t claim to **know **that physical evil can be prevented…

Euthanasia is still illegal in my country, and as far as I know, forbidden by Catholic doctrine. I do know that some physical suffering (‘evil’ is a subjective term) can be prevented by our own efforts as finite, fallible, imperfect human beings. It doesn’t take much of a stretch to suppose that it would be possible for an all-powerful, eternal, perfect god to prevent all physical suffering - or at the very least, alleviate it.

You are presuming to have knowledge that invalidates belief in supernatural reality…

I am presuming no such thing - I am supposing the improbability of a dimension of reality that is entirely imperceptible and which demonstrably does not live up to its campaign promises.

“to conceive” is not equivalent to “know that it is feasible”.

Then by the same token, to imagine or intuit that our thoughts and other such mental activity points to the existence of a supernatural soul is not equivalent to knowing that such an entity could exist. As I’ve said before, I don’t need to suppose that it is possible for reality to have been different - I do not believe that there was a perfect reality before the ‘Fall’, nor that there is a perfect spiritual reality awaiting us after our death. I don’t even presume that we know all there is to know about physical reality. I am not the one defending the notion of a perfect, all-powerful, benevolent supernatural deity.

Your **assumption **that there is no satisfactory answer to the problem of evil is falsified by the inevitable dysteleological coincidences in any immensely complex system. A universe devoid of negative factors and consequences is an infantile fantasy…

Why inevitable? Why is anything inevitable in a universe created by an all-powerful god? I agree that a universe devoid of negative factors and consequences is an infantile fantasy - but it is a fantasy evoked by belief in the God of Classical Theism.

 

[LittleSoldier]

So what exactly does omnipotence entail, if not the ability to do anything logically possible? You have certainly not demonstrated that it is logically impossible for a physical universe to be devoid of suffering - merely asserted that it is so. After all, when mere human beings, with gene-splicing technology, can create animals that glow in the dark, why should it be in any way difficult for an all-powerful god to create animals that can photosynthesise?

Omnipotence is the ability to do absolutely anything that does not go against one’s nature. So God cannot sin or be imperfect. God could certainly create animals that photosynthesize. In fact, He really has because it is only man’s classification of living organisms that relegates photosynthesizing organisms into the category of Plants. I believe there are a few organisms which do not fit neatly into the kingdoms of Animals or Plants. They have characteristics of both. It’s no problem to God but human beings seem to need to classify, classify, classify.

God certainly also has the ability to create a universe, or at least a world, with no suffering. And again, He did so. It was His gift of free will to us that introduced sin and suffering into this world. Even at that point He could have annihilated Adam or sin or both. He didn’t; probably because it was more fitting for sin to exist.

God also did not stop Lucifer from gathering angels and rebelling against Him. Angels have free will, too. When Lucifer and his followers rebelled and were not allowed in Heaven they did everything they could to cause suffering in this world and were successful.

Bad angels and sinning human beings fit together. Eve was tricked by Satan and Adam out-and-out sinned by disobeying God and by not protecting her.

Who knows if the acts of Lucifer and his followers were even the first time that angels had rebelled? We only know of Lucifer and Adam because their stories are in the Bible. It could have happened a billion times before with other angels and other planets (I don’t know if this is Church teaching; I believe the Church is silent on what has happened on other planets).

Euthanasia is still illegal in my country, and as far as I know, forbidden by Catholic doctrine. I do know that some physical suffering (‘evil’ is a subjective term) can be prevented by our own efforts as finite, fallible, imperfect human beings. It doesn’t take much of a stretch to suppose that it would be possible for an all-powerful, eternal, perfect god to prevent all physical suffering - or at the very least, alleviate it.

I agree. Where I live assisted suicide is legal - not euthanasia of human beings. At least it is called what it really is. It is condemned by the Church and for good reason. Our lives do not belong to us, nor do our bodies. We belong to God. I really wish that these finite, fallible, imperfect human beings would take the gifts of God and put them to good use by easing the suffering of those with chronic pain (like me) and the dying. To me it’s plain stupidity that it isn’t done.

God does alleviate physical suffering through His grace. The Sacrament of the Sick (formerly called Extreme Unction) is a very holy process through which this grace is given to a suffering person. When it’s a Sacrament it’s really important. I’ve received it myself. I believe it helped but of course I can’t prove it. Right now I’m thinking about people in some Eastern religions who meditate and pray and how that helps alleviate their physical suffering or the suffering of others and how it also helps with emotional suffering (in my opinion, emotional suffering, like despair, is far worse than physical suffering). The same helps in western society.

God obviously has not stopped all suffering as is obvious from what goes on in this world. As He is loving I place my trust in Him, or at least I try to. My faith is very weak.

Recently one of my cats disappeared and as a cat lover it hurt me deeply to think of him being torn apart by a coyote or raccoon while still living and experiencing agonizing pain (especially as it was my fault because I let him go outside). I can understand why human beings suffer but I am having a problem understanding why a being, created in love by God and incapable of sinning, should be allowed to undergo such suffering. I think it’s possible that God yanks animals (and perhaps some people, too) out of their bodies before the pain begins. I hope He does. I believe the Church is silent on this and is also silent on whether animals go to heaven. IMHO if only perfect beings can enter heaven animals can go right on in as they are always perfect. It’s human beings that have screwed everything up. (I’m sorry; I went a bit off-topic there).

I didn’t respond to the rest of your post because I’ve lost track of the subject of this thread and because I’m really addle-headed right now because of pain medication.

I hope you read this - this thread appears to have died and I’ve been in the Prayer Intentions forum mostly (or offline). I agree with much of what you say.

I do have a question: Do you think that it is possible for angels and human beings to have free will and not introduce suffering?

 

[tonyrey]

“Anything is possible” is a simplistic definition of omnipotence.

Anything that is spiritually, morally and - in this universe - physically possible.

You have certainly not demonstrated that it is logically impossible for a physical universe to be devoid of suffering - merely asserted that it is so.

The mere fact of vulnerability entails the need for a protective mechanism.

After all, when mere human beings, with gene-splicing technology, can create animals that glow in the dark, why should it be in any way difficult for an all-powerful god to create animals that can photosynthesise?

For what purpose?

A false dilemma. No one is compelled to live for a year in unbearable torment.
Unlike you I don’t claim to **know **

that physical evil can be prevented…
Euthanasia is still illegal in my country, and as far as I know, forbidden by Catholic doctrine. I do know that some physical suffering (‘evil’ is a subjective term) can be prevented by our own efforts as finite, fallible, imperfect human beings

“some” doesn’t equal “all”.

. It doesn’t take much of a stretch to suppose that it would be possible for an all-powerful, eternal, perfect god to prevent all physical suffering - or at the very least, alleviate it.

Enkephalins!

You are presuming to have knowledge

that invalidates belief in supernatural reality…
I am presuming no such thing - I am supposing the improbability of a dimension of reality that is entirely imperceptible and which demonstrably does not live up to its campaign promises.

Your sentence is composed of imperceptible aspects of reality…

“to conceive” is not equivalent to "know

that it is feasible".
Then by the same token, to imagine or intuit that our thoughts and other such mental activity points to the existence of a supernatural soul is not equivalent to knowing that such an entity could exist.

By the same token you reject the existence of any intangible reality such as the mind, truth, insight and choice…

As I’ve said before, I don’t need to suppose that it is possible for reality to have been different - I do not believe that there was a perfect reality before the ‘Fall’, nor that there is a perfect spiritual reality awaiting us after our death. I don’t even presume that we know all there is to know about physical reality. I am not the one defending the notion of a perfect, all-powerful, benevolent supernatural deity.

You are implying that **everything **and **everyone **have been created by physical energy that you venerate as immensely more powerful than any intelligent activity…

Your **assumption **

that there is no satisfactory answer to the problem of evil is falsified by the inevitable dysteleological coincidences in any immensely complex system. A universe devoid of negative factors and consequences is an infantile fantasy…
Why inevitable? Why is anything inevitable in a universe created by an all-powerful god?

Why is anything inevitable?

I agree that a universe devoid of negative factors and consequences is an infantile fantasy - but it is a fantasy evoked by belief in the God of Classical Theism.

It is a fantasy evoked by those who deify inanimate matter yet consider themselves to be **the greatest known possessors of insight, knowledge and understanding **even though they equate themselves with biological machines which happen to exist on a minute planet in the solar system…

You still have not explained how all negative factors and consequences could be eliminated…