Into It
New member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2008
- Messages
- 664
- MBTI Type
- ENFP
Was Descartes a Christian? I do not know. However, I feel that he probably was, as most great thinkers of his time seemed to be. I haven't read his Meditations in a while, but I do recall his description of animals as ("Machines of God," were they?) I believe there was a comparison between a clock or other device and animals. This comparison was that a clock may be made to chime at a certain time, and an animal may chirp at a certain time as well.... That is,
that animals are machines comparable to any that man has made, only more complex, because they are made by God. I am aware of Descartes experiments with vivisection, (live disection), and I have wondered for some time, "Just how can someone as smart as Descartes be so remarkably stupid as to be unaware that animals probably DO feel pain, and are not just yelping in an unconscious way comparable to a clock, when they are poked in a certain way?"
I just made a connection, though. Perhaps it was his belief in an omnibenevolent God that skewed his perception...
After all, if God is all-good, then animals must only appear to feel pain - they never actually would. The Problem of Evil, or why pain and injustice are so prominent and always present if God is all-good, can sometimes be explained away by saying, "There is an afterlife, and thus this 'injustice' is merely an illusion, as justice will be served after people are already dead."
I never appreciated this evasion, and yet, I have found it difficult to discredit in any other way than by saying, "evidence for the afterlife is scarce." But in an argument, this response is often not good enough, because, in spite of a lack of evidence, there are many people who hold the afterlife as such a certainty...and unless I can get them to admit that the afterlife as they see it is not terribly likely, then their argument stands.
A-ha! But now I have an idea that has come to me through Descartes...
Animals! Sentient creatures who are too stupid to cultivate and harvest, (and yet intelligent enough to feel pain {today's consensus...}) starve - and even those who live normal lives are often devoured fearfully and viciously.
Is there retribution for these events? Yes, I am asking if future justice will be served on behalf of these animals, such as in another life, etc.
You will probably say 'no'.
Because you would have no evidence for that either-
But if there is no retribution, then there is no justice. Am I correct that the most popular Gods are usually considered 'just'? I cannot even think of a good counter-argument for why animals suffer under the control of a good God. And I would be pretty impressed if I heard one.
that animals are machines comparable to any that man has made, only more complex, because they are made by God. I am aware of Descartes experiments with vivisection, (live disection), and I have wondered for some time, "Just how can someone as smart as Descartes be so remarkably stupid as to be unaware that animals probably DO feel pain, and are not just yelping in an unconscious way comparable to a clock, when they are poked in a certain way?"
I just made a connection, though. Perhaps it was his belief in an omnibenevolent God that skewed his perception...
After all, if God is all-good, then animals must only appear to feel pain - they never actually would. The Problem of Evil, or why pain and injustice are so prominent and always present if God is all-good, can sometimes be explained away by saying, "There is an afterlife, and thus this 'injustice' is merely an illusion, as justice will be served after people are already dead."
I never appreciated this evasion, and yet, I have found it difficult to discredit in any other way than by saying, "evidence for the afterlife is scarce." But in an argument, this response is often not good enough, because, in spite of a lack of evidence, there are many people who hold the afterlife as such a certainty...and unless I can get them to admit that the afterlife as they see it is not terribly likely, then their argument stands.
A-ha! But now I have an idea that has come to me through Descartes...
Animals! Sentient creatures who are too stupid to cultivate and harvest, (and yet intelligent enough to feel pain {today's consensus...}) starve - and even those who live normal lives are often devoured fearfully and viciously.
Is there retribution for these events? Yes, I am asking if future justice will be served on behalf of these animals, such as in another life, etc.
You will probably say 'no'.
Because you would have no evidence for that either-
But if there is no retribution, then there is no justice. Am I correct that the most popular Gods are usually considered 'just'? I cannot even think of a good counter-argument for why animals suffer under the control of a good God. And I would be pretty impressed if I heard one.