Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 12:58 AM
Peter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:24:13 +0100, Alan Gould
wrote:

In article , Helen
writes
Recently I saw a programme about whether or not plants have feelings - some
said "of course they don't" and there were others who said they were sure
they did. What do you think?

Plants react to their treatment and surroundings by various means. They
are born, grow, feed, drink, procreate, protect themselves, age and die.
They are living beings, as are mobile creatures of the animal world.
They do not have a brain but they do have the equivalent of a nerve
system by which messages are carried between their physical parts.

In humans, feelings are seen as the operation of the nerve system in
body and mind. That makes them sentient creatures. They can observe and
communicate about the feelings of other beings, but they cannot
experience them. That has often led to a belief that such feelings do
not exist, as seen in the case of fish, animals and even other humans.

I personally think that plants do have feelings of a type, though
probably not experienced as humans feel pain or emotion.


Respond to stimuli is one of the six things that all living things
do. I have been trying to remember the other five:-
Eat, breathe, reproduce, grow and ???. Judging by myself the sixth
thing could be forget!

P

  #32   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 01:54 AM
Alan Gabriel
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kay" wrote in message
...
What about Venus fly trap, which ignores a prod with a pencil, but
reacts to a live and buzzing fly?

snip


You have to touch the hairs in the trap twice to trigger it. It saves the
plant wasteing energy on something that isn't alive.

--
Regards,
Alan.

Preserve wildlife - Pickle a SQUIRREL to reply.




  #33   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 07:22 AM
Alan Gould
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Sacha
writes
But was it in that book that the experiment I'm thinking of was cited? Do
you recall?


Yes, [I still have the book] there are a lot of experiments quoted
linking plants, their life, their feelings, their growth etc. to
electricity and magnetism. The one you refer to was actually a test to
see if plants had extra-sensory perception - between them and/or to
other beings. I quote a part of the experiment:

'He [Clee Baxter, a lie detector expert] then conceived a worse threat:
he would burn the actual leaf to which the electrodes [of a lie
detector] were attached. The very instant he got the picture of flame in
his mind, and before he could move for a match, there was a dramatic
change in the tracing pattern on the graph in the form of a prolonged
upward sweep of the recording pen. Bakster had not moved, either towards
the plant or towards the recording machine. Could the plant have been
reading his mind?' Later Bakster reluctantly concluded that it had.

--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.
  #34   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 07:23 AM
Alan Gould
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Franz Heymann
writes
I challenge you to design an experiment which would prove that a plant
has any emotional reactions. The concept is an emergent phenomenon
which can only be described at all in the case of higher animals.

I have quoted one in this thread in a response to Sacha.

FWIW, I see plants as the highest of beings. Partly because they were
around long before animals, and partly because whereas animals,
including humans, are totally dependent upon plants, plant-life has no
need of animals - even of gardeners.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.
  #35   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 10:39 AM
Kay
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Peter
writes

Respond to stimuli is one of the six things that all living things
do. I have been trying to remember the other five:-
Eat, breathe, reproduce, grow and ???. Judging by myself the sixth
thing could be forget!

I knew this a year ago when my son was doing GCSEs ;-)

But my mind has gone blank. /goes and searches out Revision Guide

First - it's seven, not six ;-)

Movement
reproduction
sensitivity
nutrition
excretion
respiration
growth


--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"



  #36   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 10:41 AM
Kay
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Stephen Howard
writes
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:39:33 +0100, Kay
wrote:

What about Venus fly trap, which ignores a prod with a pencil, but
reacts to a live and buzzing fly?


That it can discriminate is perhaps down to a array of finely honed
sensors. I'd bet it wouldn't do so well with, say, an artist's
brush...unless it reacts to a range of frequencies that might be set
up by the beating of an insect's wing?


No it's a very simply arrangement - it has several hairs, rather like
cats' whiskers, and more than one of them has to be touched in sequence
to trigger the response.

OK, you may say that is mechanical, but then so are all our senses when
you look at them closely enough.


True...in the sense that there's a reaction to a stimulus, but having
an emotional response is an entirely different kettle of fish ( and
thereby hangs yet another debate ).

Regards ( currently consoling a depressed courgette ),




--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"

  #37   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 11:30 AM
Sacha
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 15/8/04 6:22, in article , "Alan
Gould" wrote:

snip
'He [Clee Baxter, a lie detector expert] then conceived a worse threat:
he would burn the actual leaf to which the electrodes [of a lie
detector] were attached. The very instant he got the picture of flame in
his mind, and before he could move for a match, there was a dramatic
change in the tracing pattern on the graph in the form of a prolonged
upward sweep of the recording pen. Bakster had not moved, either towards
the plant or towards the recording machine. Could the plant have been
reading his mind?' Later Bakster reluctantly concluded that it had.

That was it. Thanks for finding it again.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

  #38   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 01:23 PM
Dave Poole
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It strikes me that the word 'feelings' is getting a bit mixed up here.
That plants react to stimuli (in other words can 'sense') is not in
dispute. They are highly reactive organisms and even without a
recognisable central nervous system, can organise themselves to react
quite rapidly according to whether they are under stress or otherwise.

It has long fascinated me that the moment a herd of giraffes arrive to
feed on one species of Acacia in the South African veldt, the entire
neighbourhood of Acacias starts to mobilise huge and toxic quantities
of tannins to both bark and shoots. After feeding for a short time,
the animals have to move on to another species. I look upon this as
an electrical stimulus given out and received by plants under attack.
I suspect it is quite common and may even be transmitted through
ground moisture.

I carried out as bit of an experiment with the 'sensitive plant' -
Mimosa pudica quite a few years ago. Seedlings were either potted up
or planted out, 8" apart in deep trays. The potted plants were also
kept 8" apart. If the leaves on a potted plant were hit or damaged,
the entire plant would collapse as would be expected, but there was
never a reaction in its neighbours.

Those in the trays reacted differently on several occasions. Mild
hitting of the leaf would result in the collapse of foliage on that
plant only. However, cutting a leaf off or severely damaging it
often (but not always) caused other plants in that tray to react as
well - even though great care was taken not to touch or shake them in
any way.

Not a truly scientific experiment for it wasn't carried out on a large
enough scale or over a long enough period. That said, it was an
interesting exercise and my conclusions were that the plants responded
electrically and that a fluctuation in electrical discharge was
transmitted through the soil moisture, which was picked up by its
neighbours, causing them to react as well.

Back to feelings, I have great difficulty in according plants with
the ability to feel in an emotional way (love, hate etc.) for this
requires quite complex thought processing. Emotion is a consequence
of the need to remain together (as a pairing) or within one's own peer
group for self protection and the successful rearing of young. Its
roots are in baser instincts of the survival of the species and I have
great problems in accepting that such sensations are present in any
other than life forms with a highly organised central nervous systems.

Don't you think we are getting a tad too phyllanthropomorphic ;-)


Dave Poole
Torquay, Coastal South Devon UK
Winter min -2°C. Summer max 34°C.
Growing season: March - November
  #39   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 01:51 PM
Stephen Howard
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:39:21 +0100, Kay
wrote:

In article , Peter
writes

Respond to stimuli is one of the six things that all living things
do. I have been trying to remember the other five:-
Eat, breathe, reproduce, grow and ???. Judging by myself the sixth
thing could be forget!

I knew this a year ago when my son was doing GCSEs ;-)

But my mind has gone blank. /goes and searches out Revision Guide

First - it's seven, not six ;-)

Movement
reproduction
sensitivity
nutrition
excretion
respiration
growth


What about death?

Regards,



--
Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
http://www.shwoodwind.co.uk
Emails to: showard{who is at}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
  #40   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 01:56 PM
Stephen Howard
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:41:26 +0100, Kay
wrote:

In article , Stephen Howard
writes
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:39:33 +0100, Kay
wrote:

What about Venus fly trap, which ignores a prod with a pencil, but
reacts to a live and buzzing fly?


That it can discriminate is perhaps down to a array of finely honed
sensors. I'd bet it wouldn't do so well with, say, an artist's
brush...unless it reacts to a range of frequencies that might be set
up by the beating of an insect's wing?


No it's a very simply arrangement - it has several hairs, rather like
cats' whiskers, and more than one of them has to be touched in sequence
to trigger the response.


Aha.. that's why I figured the artist's brush would probably trigger a
response.

Regards,



--
Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
http://www.shwoodwind.co.uk
Emails to: showard{who is at}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk


  #41   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 03:08 PM
Alan Gould
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Malcolm
writes
Hmm, but that's just not true, is it? What about plants that are
dependent upon insects for fertilisation not to mention those which
depend on birds and animals for seed dispersal?

Those plants have developed or evolved that way to make use of animals
etc. which are there now, but were not so previously. That does not
alter the fact that on this planet non-plant life is wholly dependent
upon plant life, but not vice-versa.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.
  #42   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 03:09 PM
Alan Gould
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Dave Poole
writes

Back to feelings, I have great difficulty in according plants with
the ability to feel in an emotional way (love, hate etc.) for this
requires quite complex thought processing. Emotion is a consequence
of the need to remain together (as a pairing) or within one's own peer
group for self protection and the successful rearing of young. Its
roots are in baser instincts of the survival of the species and I have
great problems in accepting that such sensations are present in any
other than life forms with a highly organised central nervous systems.

When plants react to circumstances in a defensive or protective way, is
that not an equivalent of fear or wariness in animals? And when they act
in ways which will lead to their procreation, isn't that equivalent to
the mating instinct in animals, known as love (or whatever) in humans?
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.
  #43   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 03:39 PM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Alan Gould" wrote in message
...
In article , Franz Heymann
writes
I challenge you to design an experiment which would prove that a

plant
has any emotional reactions. The concept is an emergent phenomenon
which can only be described at all in the case of higher animals.

I have quoted one in this thread in a response to Sacha.


You have not. You have quoted a lot of anecdotal rubbish with
exactly zero scientific content.. Not only was the experiment
uncontrolled, it also was not repeated by an independent observer. I
asked for the design of an experiment. which would prove that a plant
has emotional reactions. I did not think it neceaasry to insert the
word "controlled" before "experiment", bur I do so now,
retrospectively. Other "experiments" don't count in this context.

FWIW, I see plants as the highest of beings.


Your definition of "high" in this context clearly differs from mine
and from that of any rational biologist.

Partly because they were
around long before animals, and partly because whereas animals,


There were even more primitive life forms in existence before plants
came on the scene. Why don't you classify them as even higher
life-forms that plants?

including humans, are totally dependent upon plants, plant-life has

no
need of animals - even of gardeners.


Oh dear.
{:-((

Franz




  #44   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 03:39 PM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Alan Gould" wrote in message
...
In article , Sacha
writes
But was it in that book that the experiment I'm thinking of was

cited? Do
you recall?


Yes, [I still have the book] there are a lot of experiments quoted
linking plants, their life, their feelings, their growth etc. to
electricity and magnetism. The one you refer to was actually a test

to
see if plants had extra-sensory perception - between them and/or to
other beings. I quote a part of the experiment:

'He [Clee Baxter, a lie detector expert]


That does not bode well for starters. Lie detectors have been shown
in controlled experiments to be totally unreliable, except insofar as
they intimidate the person being interviewed.

then conceived a worse threat:
he would burn the actual leaf to which the electrodes [of a lie
detector] were attached. The very instant he got the picture of

flame in
his mind, and before he could move for a match, there was a dramatic
change in the tracing pattern on the graph in the form of a

prolonged
upward sweep of the recording pen.


That is anecdotal. Anecdotal evidence is not evidence obtained fron
controlled experiments and therefore have exactly zero scientific
value.
Is he implying that the leaf had predictive powers?
And in any case, leaves don't have skins whose surface resistivity
behaves like that of humans.

Bakster had not moved, either towards
the plant or towards the recording machine. Could the plant have

been
reading his mind?' Later Bakster reluctantly concluded that it had.


That little lot,.I am afraid, can only be described as vintage crap.
It is on a par with the book I read which gave "evidence" that Jesus
did not in fact die on the cross, but was rescued by his close
friends, and after he had recovered from the ordeal, escaped to France
with Mary Magdalen, where they founded the Plantagenet family.

Franz



  #45   Report Post  
Old 15-08-2004, 05:35 PM
Dave Poole
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:09:39 +0100, Alan Gould
wrote:

When plants react to circumstances in a defensive or protective way, is
that not an equivalent of fear or wariness in animals?


No, it is purely the result of a stimulus in the same way that
photosynthesis starts to occur when a plant is exposed to light or
that wilting occurs as a result of lack of water.

And when they act
in ways which will lead to their procreation, isn't that equivalent to
the mating instinct in animals, known as love (or whatever) in humans?


Well, for a start, the mating instinct in many humans has nothing to
do with the need to procreate and is more to do with recreational (and
to an extent personal or even selfish) gratification. In some cases
it is accompanied by a deeper emotional sensation, but by no means
always. With the exception of Bonobo chimpanzees and some species of
dolphin, there are few if any indications that other animals act in a
similar way.

Sorry, I think you are way off the mark here. You are projecting
human emotions onto lower animals and then to plants. This is an all
too common human failing that ill-serves the objects of those
emotions. There is no science to prove that plants have 'feelings' or
emotions. All living things seek to multiply, whether they are of a
microbial or higher life form. Procreation is one of the defining
characteristics of living things. Instinct (in animals) and reaction
to stimulus (in plants) is not the same as emotion and it is facile
to make such a comparison.

Nor do plants act in any positive or selective way that leads to their
procreation. They react to stimuli which ultimately leads to
flowering. The stimuli can be day-length, maturation, stress and
temperature amongst many other things. Plants have no choice in the
matter - their purpose is to grow, reproduce and thereby perpetuate
themselves. Nor do they select 'mates'. So long as pollen arriving
upon the stigmas is viable and from a genetically compatible plant
(ie. same or related species) fertilisation will occur.

Dave Poole
Torquay, Coastal South Devon UK
Winter min -2°C. Summer max 34°C.
Growing season: March - November
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My Feelings About Organic EVP MAN Gardening 22 10-02-2011 05:43 PM
feelings Peter Lucas[_2_] United Kingdom 5 15-10-2010 11:58 PM
Debate Over Plants Having Feelings [email protected] Plant Science 5 31-10-2007 07:58 PM
Do you still get warm and fuzzy feelings from your plants? Warner B Freshwater Aquaria Plants 1 25-04-2005 01:52 PM
[IBC] Bpnsai feelings, was/Chye Tan: The Spirit of Bonsai Design Kitsune Miko Bonsai 6 21-01-2004 02:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017