From: EckertWAIII@aol.com
Date: Thu Aug 14 2003 - 14:17:24 EDT
I agree that it is logically possible that animals might very well experience
God in some way. However, I also believe that there is presently no evidence
that they do and that likely won't change. We have no solid scientific basis
of knowing that non-human animals feel pain; however, to believe they don't is
simply ludicrous. We can observe behaviors, vocalizations, reflexes,
autonomic responses, etc that are consistent with the responses of humans when they
also verbally report to an investigator that they are experiencing pain. When
animals can tell us that they experience pain or experience God, then we'll know
(assuming they aren't lying). :-)
-Bill
-- William A. Eckert III, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist Inspire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Durham, NCIn a message dated 8/14/2003 10:11:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, bnelson301@yahoo.com writes:
> What I was getting at is that a) we have no experience > of what it is to be other animals or things so I don't > know how we can say whether they in some way perceive > God (which may be entirely different than having > "faith"). Panpsychism/panexperientialism on which > much process thought is built starts from the > assumption that God can lure *everything* to greater > and lesser extents and that everything (not just > sentient, much less self-conscious, creatures) in some > sense has an ability to perceive and respond to the > lure. I don't have any frame of reference to say > whether that is correct or not. I would not presume > that position is incorrect either as the post seemed > to do.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Aug 14 2003 - 14:18:45 EDT