| All rights reserved. |
KevinGlenn.net
the problem of pain
the problem of pain
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
How does the animal kingdom experience pain? The thought into the animal kingdom is
one that raises questions for Lewis such as “why were they made?”, and “what are
they?”
Lewis organizes his response to the issue in three questions. First, what do animals
suffer? There is a distinction among the animals themselves. A worm, if it experiences
anything close to pain will not experience like a fish or a horse. There is even a
hesitation to use the word pain to describe the sensations of lower animal forms
(worms and fishes). There is also a distinction between sentience and consciousness.
To experience A,B,and C as sequential sensations, where one begins, fades, then the
other, and so forth, constitutes consciousness. It is the existence of a steady line of
self awareness against which a stream of sensation flows. Conversely, the non-
conscious state is one in which there is no awareness of self, and sensations
experienced as distinct occurrences of a state of being. Two pops to the hind of a dog
would be experienced by the dog as two distinct, unrelated and exclusive experiences
of pain, rather than an awareness of one related whipping that provokes emotions of
fight, flight or obedience.
Second, how did pain and disease enter the animal world? The obvious answer for
Lewis was the Fall of man. However, he does raise the possibility that creatures may
have fallen because of the consequences of Satan’s rebellion before mankind arrived
on the scene. Man’s role in subduing the earth would make more sense if the earth in
which he was placed needed to be redeemed. The fall of man, then left all of creation
in a state of corruption, devoid of its intended redeemer. No wonder creation moans.
Third, how can animal suffering be reconciled with God’s justice? The largest part of
the answer is that innocent suffering for humans and animals is a product of the
rebellion of Satan for animals and the rebellion of man and its own pain brought to the
animal world. Lewis alludes here to the possibility that animals may be granted
immortality on the basis of their connection (possible state of redemption?) with
humans. The dog, who through training and care has developed a sense of being
(dependent of the “self” of his master), may, by connection live on with the family unit.
Here’s how it sounds to me, as an animal is led to develop greater similarity to what it
was originally created as, both the animal and it’s redeemer will maintain that
connection. Lewis also raises the possibility that some animals in the wild may have
established a connection unknowingly (dolphins who have saved drowning swimmers
come to mind), may be granted immortality.
Do all dogs go to heaven? Maybe some of them do. I would expect animals to be a
part of the restored earth. Why not? The question is will the animals be those who lived
on earth before, or new creations? I hope the animals I’ve killed during hunting
seasons don’t remember me.