Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
My Feelings About Organic | Gardening | |||
feelings | United Kingdom | |||
Debate Over Plants Having Feelings | Plant Science | |||
Do you still get warm and fuzzy feelings from your plants? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
[IBC] Bpnsai feelings, was/Chye Tan: The Spirit of Bonsai Design | Bonsai |