this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
578 points (85.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26643 readers
3215 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 91 points 2 months ago (20 children)

"Know" is a stretch. Plants respond to attack by releasing chemicals (e.g. nettles and grasses), curling or retracting their leaves (e.g. acacia), or by changing their morphology (e.g. holly); but they have no nervous system - let alone a brain - so it's not like you're killing an animal.

[–] [email protected] 88 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Plants having no nervous system is being challenged with the idea that the plant itself is its central nervous system.

They react to stimulus, they emit sounds (different ones when in “pain”), and communicate with each other.

They don’t have consciousness in a way we understand

I dont mean this as a “dunk” but more of a how neat is that

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

It's always funny to me how people eat up the concept of a distrubuted neural network in tech but scoff at the same idea applying to something like a tree or a fungus.

Pando is the largest organism by area, and the Humungous Fungus is the largest by mass. The idea that those organisms don't "think" in some way is laughable.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"In some way" is doing A LOT of heavy lifting there. ... although in the general sense, agreed.

Especially given how many outright wrong or otherwise assinine conclusions some "thinking" animals come to... Perhaps communicative consciousness is overrated on the intelligence scale.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It always seems lime some excuse in a counter response by vеgаns

The number of times I've responded to them telling them that plants probably process pain in a different way to us has always been shot down by them

Tell them that brains extremely simplified are just on and off responses to certain stimuli / information just like plants have specific reponsonses to stimuli and computers having 1's and 0's that respond to information

A mycelium network could be counted as a brain

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (5 children)

If you actually believe harming plants causes them pain and that that is bad, you should be vegan. Animal agriculture harms far, far more plants than any plant agriculture ever could.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

because humans invent things from scratch that nature has already created and optimzed, it's why we're seeing a lot of optimizations on current tech that comes from nature itself.

It's a really weird problem to have.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Go find that video of a slime mold optimizing Japan's rail system by finding oats in a maze

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

isn't this similar to or equivalent in concept to letting water pathfind through a maze for example?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

No. The slime mold doesn't just solve the maze. It figures out the optimal path and grows only where it needs to reach the goal. It's a fascinating thing to watch in time-lapse. The "water in a maze" idea is that if it fills every passage, the only drain would be the exit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You should read the book "entangled life" if you haven't already. It's fascinating.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I'll trade you. I'll read ur book if you check out the ender quintet, or at least speaker of the dead. The hierarchy of foreignness is a concept that has REALLY stuck with me. Also pequininos are bros.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

We don't know how consciousness works enough to say they don't. Having a brain and/or nervous system might not be necessary.

They don't have muscles either, but some plants are known to uproot themselves and fucking move.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Yeah, plants aren't stationary. All plants move, just very, very slowly compared to animals. Looking at time lapse videos of vines growing, reaching out for something to grab on to and stuff is pretty neat. They kind of whip around in circles until they feel they've hit something worth grabbing onto.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Wait that's cool as hell, which plants?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Maybe tumbleweeds? I think..

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

We don’t know how consciousness works enough to say they don’t. Having a brain and/or nervous system might not be necessary.

Hmm sorry but no, there are traits exhibited by conscious entities which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness. This is a nice explainer on consciousness, note that it’s not saying anything about needing a brain to exhibit those traits

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/#DesQueWhaFeaCon

correct me if I am misremembering sth

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

there are traits exhibited by conscious entities which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness.

Implying we have a way of determining whether an entity is conscious or not. That's the entire point of contention here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

How will we ever know for sure if plants have their own form of consciousness that doesn't follow a list of requirements that's based on animals, or can feel pain.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (7 children)

which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness.

See what you did there? You assume a priori which entities lack consciousness, and then motivate this by claiming they lack traits that can be observed in conscious entities. That is very neatly circular.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (3 children)

They have the knowledge and are doing something about it. If other plants can send out this chemical by observing it themselves, that sounds like a reaction from a communication. It may not be cognition like we expect but it is behaving like cognition would. Hard to argue that plants don't know or care of their friends start dying.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'd argue that knowledge is more than that, otherwise books or state machines could also be said to know things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

The plants are acquiring information and making an independent change to their status with this information. Books do nothing with knowledge other than communicate it to others. Machines are unable to make independent changes to itself unless programmed to do so.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

This is why I don't eat books

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

epistemologists agree: knowledge is a justified true belief.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn't that how we justified boiling Crayfish alive though?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Some misguided monsters, yes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

We can't say that brains are required for a mind to exist; we have no way of knowing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

by this logic do people even truly exist. Maybe you're just the only real person in the world, maybe im the only real person in the world, we have no way of proving this.

load more comments (14 replies)