GardenBanter.co.uk - View Single Post

David Hare-Scott[_2_] · 11-12-2010, 10:11 PM posted to rec.gardens

Brooklyn1 wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 10:11:50 -0500, wrote:

Bill who putters writes:

"The idea that plants basically have nerves a conclusion that
grows out of hard-to-interpret observations of electrical activity
in plant tissue has ignited a thunderstorm of its own among plant
scientists in recent years.

Article in question is a semantic game.

Here they are attempting to stretch the meaning of the phrase
"swarm intelligence".

Plants reacting to the environment is in no way intelligence as the
word is commonly understood.

That's a matter of perspective. Flora survives well without fauna but
not vice versa... plants have obviously evolved a higher form of
intelligence... reproduction and photosynthesis from the perspective
of plants is the higher intelligence... only humans make asinine
superiority judgements.

Of course there is nothing asinine about using a private definition of
"intelligence" to muddy the waters further. By any common definition of the
word plants are not intelligent. Yes they react to their environment but so
do microorganisms and crystals. That is not intelligent.

I hadn't thought before today that you were not superior to plants but since
you are claiming it I am forced to accept that there might be something in
it. This might also explain how you can see the world from a plant's
perspective. How do you do that? Do you wave your stamen in the breeze
hoping a receptive female will be near enough for you to reproduce?

David