(10-31-2011, 02:29 PM)unity100 Wrote: your approach is incorrect in that it assumes the activity measure on reactions from a plant can be traced to the nature of the reaction.
No, not at all. In fact I am saying the opposite of what you thought I was saying: Because at the moment of the reaction any number of events have occurred (the researcher thinking some thought, a cat eating a mouse across the street, another researcher having a birthday party, not to mention the rest of the entities on the planet), there's no conclusive way to know exactly what triggered the reaction in the plant.
DW's book seems to have made the assumption you are attributing to me, and I am actually contesting it.
(10-31-2011, 02:29 PM)unity100 Wrote: moreover, the basis for what science uses to measure reactions, is based on human physique and physiology - even at that, it is way too young to interpret the nature of actual emotions.
the plant may be giving strong reactions, but they may be positive, or negative.
That is exactly my point! The researcher was interpreting the plant's reactions according to human physiology and emotions.
(10-31-2011, 02:29 PM)unity100 Wrote: what it DOES prove is that, plants do have emotions.
No, it doesn't even prove that. It proves that plants DO react to their environments, but it doesn't prove that it's an emotional reaction. It might be. But it might also be some sort of reflection of the emotions of 3D entities, perhaps in the same way that a piece of technology called a polygraph test can register the emotions of humans. Plants might be much better at it than technology, since they are alive and part of the cosmic web. But to even say it's an emotion, is doing the very thing you thought I was doing: attributing emotions as understood by humans, to a different lifeform.
I contend that the capacity to feel emotions is something that evolves during 2D and continues to evolve in 3D. Animals undoubtedly feel fear. That is a very basic, primal emotion. More highly evolved 2D animals demonstrate love. But even then, it's a very basic love. It hasn't yet evolved into all the nuances humans experience. I've observed sadness, disappointment, shame, and even grief, in my pets. But I've never observed anger in them. Even 2 cats fighting aren't angry, even though it might appear so at first glance. As soon as 1 of them asserts dominance over the other, it's over. No lasting, residual anger.
What plants are experiencing, might be the rudiments of emotion. Maybe. But the research that is often touted as irrefutable evidence for human-like emotion, isn't irrefutable at all. It's quite subject to interpretation and speculation.
The very fact that the same response was registered whether the trigger was negative (intention to harm the plant) or positive (surprise birthday party) completely negates any claims of conclusive 'proof' that plants were feeling fear or even any other emotion. It might be. But it's far from conclusive at this point. That a plant would react the same to grass getting cut by a lawn mower, as it would to a birthday party, neutralizes any conclusions. It shows only that plants react; it doesn't show why they react.