• anewfox@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 hours ago

    if you rank “care about plants” people way up there with AI worshippers, you’re lost to propaganda.

    • CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Do “people who care about plants” really think they have feelings and are intelligent? I consider myself a person who cares about plants and I think they even have rudimentary ways of chemical signaling one another that could be seen as communication but I don’t think they have feelings as we use the word and I don’t think they’re intelligent on any level.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        think they even have rudimentary ways of chemical signaling one another that could be seen as communication but I don’t think they have feelings as we use the word and I don’t think they’re intelligent on any level.

        Just to play devil’s advocate… The more we understand about consciousness and the more we study animals like invertebrates, the more we keep finding out our previous assumptions keep getting proven wrong.

        Terms like feelings, emotions, and intelligence are all open to interpretation and debate.

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    Plants probably do have their own version of feelings, like any living organism. Just not human ones.

    • Airfried@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Trees and Mushrooms are known to communicate. If you fell a tree, the whole forest will know within minutes. Whether they have feelings or not I can’t tell.

        • Seleni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          A lot of plants put out those smells as a way of saying ‘something’s eating me!’ to the local predators.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          58
          ·
          1 day ago

          From what I understand it’s a pheromone(?) reaction that causes the grass to send water and nutrients lower down into the plant, so they can more easily survive being grazed on / lawnmowered.

          • BooBees@fedinsfw.app
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            There are evolutionary mechanisms that let many plants excrete foul tasting or smelling compounds when they’re alerted to nearby danger, from their other leaves being eaten, or those nearby that release warning compounds.

            Plants also work in tandem with fungus and other microbial life to sort of message needs to get support for survival, possibly defense as well.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            13 hours ago

            I think people liken it to human consciousness because that’s what they know, but I think most people understand that’s an abstraction and the reality is much more sciencey and nuanced

          • robear@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Paywall so I can’t actually read the whole article but from the abstract:

            Based on a survey of the brain anatomy, functional complexity, and behaviors of a broad spectrum of animals, criteria were established for the emergence of consciousness.

            “We’ve drawn an arbitrary line around ‘consciousness’ and have decided what’s on either side” isn’t exactly the concrete dismissal they seem to think it is.

            • angband@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              Not arbitrary: consciousness is a defined word with historical meaning. “Consciousness comes from the Latin word conscious, which means “knowing with” or “having joint knowledge.” The term evolved in English during the 17th century, with its modern meaning relating to awareness of one’s own mind first appearing in the late 1600s.”

              You have arbitrarily redefined consciousness, implicitly by context to include any response to the environment. What good is epistemology if a plant’s hormonal action implies self awareness?

              Edit: Imagine, if you will, that the stream of consciousness using language to tie a plant’s hormonal action to self awareness, e.g., words like “plants know when” is just as much of a cognitive and emotional hallucination as the most sublime sounding gibberish produced by an LLM.

            • dumnezero@piefed.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              While you can just make shit up in definitions, you don’t get to claim that others use your definition. All you’re actually doing here is destroying words.

      • imadethis@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        The typical smell from cut grass is actually microbes. The soil is very much disturbed by the way we cut grass (not talking about reaping hay/wheat/etc here, just your typical suburbanite with a lawn mower). I can’t remember what they are now for the life of me, but the microbiology professor at my college loved explaining to the younguns that the reason the local water tasted/smelled bad (compared to most places) was that the same variety of microbe responsible for the cut grass smell was present in high concentrations in the source for the city water. Once he pointed it out, you could pick out the similarity.

    • jdr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Is it worth worrying about though? Is it bad to make a plant sad?

        • jdr@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Sure. But I don’t think it’s relevant either. I’d consider it something like worrying about how a chair feels that I’m sitting on it.

    • PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      Plants probably do have their own version of feelings,

      Just like LLMs?
      I think the word you are looking for is senses.

    • PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      The only inconvenient part is that you get absolute morons that hear words like “communicate”, “warn”, “react”, etc, given to chemical reactions, and believe it’s sentience and shit.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Fr. Plants are as sentient as my phone. Right now it’s sending pain signals because it’s at 8% battery. Am I torturing it by not plugging it in?

          • deft@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            What?

            There’s a difference between sentience and consciousness. There’s also the fact that there is no actual way to measure these concepts and say for a fact if something experienced one or not.

            Plants have goal oriented behavior, plants have chemicals that respond to stimuli. Sentience is simply the basic ability to feel and experience. There are absolutely arguments to be made around that.

            Most arguments against things being sentient or not is a lack of a neural structure. But that’s like saying things without mouths cannot eat. The limited human experience makes one both arrogant in assumptions and ignorant of other’s experiences because they can’t relate.

            “Sentience” is just chemical reactions all the way down. There’s no reason to fully assert plants are not sentient. Especially when we can’t even define what makes something conscious or not.

            • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              12 hours ago

              Ok then. Tell me why you think a chatbot could be sentient then.

              First, read and try to understand the definition of sentient:

              1. Capable of sensing or feeling, conscious of or responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling

              2. Aware

              3. Finely sensitive in perception or feeling

              (Clue: look up the definition for “inanimate”, and also for any words that you don’t understand from the previous definitions. Do this in the dictionary, not with an LLM)

                • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Oh, well in that case I agree with you actually, my apologies.

                  I guess I’ve just gotten used to having to argue with people on here about whether or not their shitty software is sentient.

    • flamingos-cant (hopepunk arc)@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      We know for a fact that animals think and feel, even if not on our level, and we still have no qualms about eating them.

      Who’s ‘we’ here, because I have plenty of qualms with eating animals.

        • underisk@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Right, I just brought it up because the people with moral objections to meat tend to ground them in the cruel treatment of animals. If you can be cruel to plants too then I don’t see a way out of making a moral compromise unless you just eat rocks (not the computer rocks though, too smart).

          • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Yeah but you can’t be cruel to plants and even if you could, it takes way less plants eating them directly than filtering the nutrients through an actually sentient animal.

            • underisk@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Yeah, what you just described is a moral compromise. “Eating the plants is cruel, but less cruel than letting more get eaten to feed animals to eat instead.”

              I don’t think vegans argue that sentience is what makes it cruel, either. Otherwise they’d be fine with eating fish, bugs, and probably chickens. If plants are capable of suffering then that would probably be enough to at least make the argument about eating them being cruel. You’d basically have to follow the diet of the alien hive mind from Pluribus; foraging windfall, scavenging, and autocannibalism.

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                Are mixing up sentience and sapience? Fish and chickens are definitely sentient, e.g. they have a subjective experience of their existence. Bugs as well, I’d guess.

                • underisk@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  Maybe! I used sentience because you used it in your comment and can never keep the two straight. If sentience is a subjective experience then plants would have that by having feelings and intelligence, wouldn’t they?

  • chocrates@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    We might not understand intelligence. Plants might be “intelligent”. At minimum we know that plants communicate within their cells and with each other and that they can learn.

    I like to fantasize that a large oak is a huge mass of neural tissue and that alder stand that is the largest organism or something is a super brain.

      • moonshadow@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        The way hollywood is going these days it just might be! :D

        But why would a table think about those things? I sure don’t. It’d probably be more into like, bearing loads. I bet it likes when lots of people put full plates around its edge and doesn’t when you stand on the middle to change a light bulb

        Me I’m more into alternative energy schemes

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    Eh, consciousness is just an elaborate Markov Chain on life that didn’t go the botany route hundreds of millions years ago.

    Intelligence is just a word we came up with very recently to try explain stuff.

    LLMs are literally just us hearing ourselves for once.

    • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Consciousness is just an elaborate markov chain… I cant even…

      The earth is just a rock… there im smart

    • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      22 hours ago

      A living organism is a strange loop. Computer software isn’t. Just because you can describe both in probabilistic terms doesn’t mean they’re the same phenomenon.