The Problem Of Pleasure
So, I'm reading Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton and I start with the introduction written by Philip Yancey. It's got be excited to dive into the classic of Christian apologetics and he poses a question posed by Chesterton.
Christians are often forced to answer the "problem of pain" by athiests for obvious reasons. Simply, "How could a good and loving God allow pain to exist?" It's simple and stunningly complex at the same time and every Christian worth his salt needs to have wrestled with this issue. I have and I believe I've come to a conclusion on the issue.
With that said athiests themselves have a question to ponder as well. The "problem of pleasure." Simply, "In the meaningless and random evolutionary process why did pleasure become necessary?" You don't need to feel pleasure to survive on any level. You don't need pleasure for reproduction or injesting sustinance. We derive pleasure from color yet we don't need to see color for sight to function. And the list goes one and on. So, why is pleasure a necessary step in the evolutionary process?
Christians are often forced to answer the "problem of pain" by athiests for obvious reasons. Simply, "How could a good and loving God allow pain to exist?" It's simple and stunningly complex at the same time and every Christian worth his salt needs to have wrestled with this issue. I have and I believe I've come to a conclusion on the issue.
With that said athiests themselves have a question to ponder as well. The "problem of pleasure." Simply, "In the meaningless and random evolutionary process why did pleasure become necessary?" You don't need to feel pleasure to survive on any level. You don't need pleasure for reproduction or injesting sustinance. We derive pleasure from color yet we don't need to see color for sight to function. And the list goes one and on. So, why is pleasure a necessary step in the evolutionary process?
Posted by Kevin D. on
Sunday July 10, 2005 at 3:41am
I asked the same question of an Atheist I knew not long ago. This girl asked me why monogamous marraiages were needed because people are an animal, and animals (for the most part, Geese come to mind as an exception to the rule) are inherently doing what it take to reproduce. In essence, this wanted to justify living the life she chose.
Over and over she asked me why God would make people choose to live against "nature."
And I came to the same question.... why is the "fun" or "pleasurable" way through life the correct choice? Pleasure and fun are unnecsscary. But it got to the point that I couldn;t talk to this person anymore. When it came down to it, authority was the problem (as it is with many atheists). The problem is living your life under some sort of guidelines and authority and coming to terms that no matter what, you aren't in charge of your life.
Besides, I still look at evolution as a theory.... and yet unproven, as it stands today.
The arguement goes both ways and frequently these same people want to have it both ways while denying others the same.