Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
The question of whether a plant has consciousness already has at least one measuring way of being resolved. The Sc Am Nov 2017 has an article How to Make a Consciousness Meter.
This article discusses how a measure and meter came about for determining whether brain injured people are still conscious or rendered only vegetative congenitally or from injuries. Using this measure plants after getting the "zip and zap" would likely score only a vegetative number [my take].
The measure is based on a crude approximation of IIT's formal calculus which gives a measure of consciousness. The complexity of consciousness measure was modified by using a likeness to the zip and zap algorithm that is used for file compression.
The meter has some faults and gets some false positives? for consciousness with some reticent patients that cannot communicate anything but who show a high zip score when getting zapped. The zip and zap measure comes up with a single number that reflects how much consciousness a subject has in their brain.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
Sheep learned to recognize photos of Obama and other celebrities, neuroscientists say
Sheep join the small group of animals shown to recognize human faces, including monkeys, dogs and horses.
Horses, according to a study published in 2016, can also identify emotion in human facial expressions
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/07/sheep-recognize-people-from-photos-study/
It's interesting to contemplate if this is the result of domestication or the reason these animals are domesticated is because they could more easily identify with humans?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
At the moment consciousness falls under the heading of not being able to quite put your paw on it,
Thus YOU have proved you know nothing about it yet wave it off and steer around it and are still the expert on it
along with your ridiculous projected interpretations of Panpsychism onto people.
There is no "ism/s" in the absolute truth.
Panpsychism = all material objects have parts with mental properties
That IS completely untrue and is a gross materialists interpretation rooted in the mechanistic consciousness of life.
Then along with your ridiculous claim that you having a degree in horticulture makes you an expert on whether plants have consciousness or not.
You are insane ...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
My having a hort degree doesn't mean I know about plant consciousness - it means I know about plant behavior and that behavior is genetically programmed and wholly without consciousness of any kind.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Total contradiction again ... you remain insane
Panpsychism is the view that all things have a mind or a mind-like quality"
I already above said that this is NOT true and IS a mechanistic interpretation of which I have no business with.
You're insane Joe.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
If you believe brains aren't the source of consciousness and minds then, by definition, you're a panpsychist.
I don't agree with this interpretation. Panpsychism at its essence is the idea that consciousness is an intrinsic property and possessed by everything. In some sense, it is "materialistic" because we usually restrict "everything" to material (or perhaps physical) things. In this interpretation, the smallest bits of matter have a quantity of consciousness that builds up as you put more bits together.
My sense of Werner's view, and maybe Largo's, is that these (consciousness and all that) are things that come to us from "beyond" the physical.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Largo would appear to acknowledge a mind-brain coupling, so one way or another that means material is somehow imbued with consciousness in some manner. Werner is another matter altogether - gotta love that absolute truth.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
You can see that Ed as a real scientist does have a very good brain.
As for you Joe you have foot in your mouth again as below,
I know about plant behavior and that behavior is genetically programmed and wholly without consciousness of any kind.
First, you prove you are without full understanding of consciousness and then make an absolute on consciousness.
And here you are making an absolute and at the very same time mocking absolutes.
You are a mess .....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Not at all. There is no known plant behavior not tied to gene expression. You can woo all you want, but until you can produce evidence to the contrary it's all just woo belief.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Consciousness: that which goes away under general anesthesia
Not the complete truth, perhaps, but a succinct statement of what we do know.
Works for organisms other than humans and highlights a difference between animal and plant consciousness.
If we learn why a small molecule like halothane can subdue your conscious mind to the extent that a surgeon can cut you without your being aware of it, it may teach us something about consciousness,
"Anesthetics have been used for 160 years, and how they work is one of the great mysteries of neuroscience,"
James Sonner of the University of California, San Francisco
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
"Anesthetics have been used for 160 years, and how they work is one of the great mysteries of neuroscience,"
Good one, Andy.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Works for organisms other than humans and highlights a difference between animal and plant consciousness.
Plants and animals both exhibit behavior, plants however, don't exhibit conscious behavior of any kind - i.e. there is no such thing as 'plant consciousness'.
Again, that's central to the question - at what point on the tree of extant species is conscious behavior evident? And is it a hard demarc or can consciousness be seen to emerge as behavior becomes more sophisticated moving up from species to species? I would suggest it isn't a hard demarc and that conscious behavior progressively emerged species-by-species on multiple evolutionary branches.
The choices are just that, that a) consciousness is organically evolved behavior, b) that it's some form of fundamental panpsychic phenomena, or (nod to Ed) c) it's non-physical phenomena which channels through or conveniently hovers about brains.
Personally, if it's the latter I don't really see why consciousness would bother with physical reality at all - so messy and constantly churning - what would be the point of imbuing meat brains with minds (and why brains)? It's woo plain and simple from where I sit, not to mention a form of bizarre exceptionalism indicative of a loathing of the any aspect of the idea we are mere animals.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Joe H -- ".... there is no such thing as 'plant consciousness'."
Another Absolute.
Modern science does NOT make absolutes all while you mock absolutes.
Now you're a scientific hypocrite.
All while claiming you have no understanding of consciousness making absolutes on consciousness.
You remain a total mess and are insane ....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Please indicate which plant on planet Earth exhibits conscious behavior of any kind. There are none.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
which plant on planet Earth exhibits conscious behavior of any kind. There are none.
I already did many times, you can't even read, as you only see your own self and project that.
And in bold you again made an absolute.
You're still insane ....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
And as I've stated, there hasn't been a single theory, experiment or result supporting plant-based conscious behavior which has survived peer-review. There's a reason for that.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Peer-reviewed by biased closed minded mechanistic conscious only theory scientists who make hypocritical absolutes all the time.
You're insane.
Go make the experiment yourself.
But you can't as you're too deep into defending your own self-made insane mess that you've stepped in .....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
The descent into abject nutjoberry is really sad to see.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "Panpsychism is the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world."
Let us know!