A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to • Hacker News Board

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#181

Post by CuriouslyC » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:29 PM UTC

swebs wrote: post #176

>Trees exchange chemicals with fungus, and send seeds—essentially information packets—with wind, birds, bats, and other visitors for delivery around the world. Simard specializes in the underground relationships of trees. Her research shows that below the earth are vast networks of roots working with fungi to move water, carbon, and nutrients among trees of all species. These complex, symbiotic networks mimic human n…

How is a molecule different from a word? How is a spatial and temporal sequence of molecules different from a sentence?

I think language, like consciousness, is one of those things that a lot of people have a chauvinistic definition for...

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#182

Post by sakopov » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:33 PM UTC

ssijak wrote: post #71

Often on Ayahuasca I feel extreme empathy for plants and feel like I communicate with them without spoken sounds. Sometimes I wish that it would work that way in real life, it is really wonderful and humbling feeling.

One thing I find rather interesting is that a lot of people who trip on mushrooms mention that they see the world around them much more vivid and alive, especially when being out in nature. I've always wondered if this was something beyond some kind of chemical reaction in our body.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#183

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

veddox wrote: post #178

jeandejean wrote: post #141

These theories of humanizing trees become more and more popular lately. But it seems based on observation and speculation only, which is almost certainly completely biased against what people would like to hear: that trees are like the lord of the rings ents. How cool! Not to mention that Waorani just evidently lack abstraction in their language, which is at the root of understanding the world, not missing some obvio…

Yes, and this is even worse: > Haskell points out that throughout literary and musical history there are references to the songs of trees, and the way they speak: whispering pines, falling branches, crackling leaves, the steady hum buzzing through the forest. Human artists have always known on a fundamental level that trees talk, even if they don’t quite say they have a “language.” All of these "songs of trees" are p…

[deleted]

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#184

Post by CuriouslyC » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

fifnir wrote: post #139

rbosinger wrote: post #17

This is what alien life will be like. We will decide it is alive but not understand fully what that means.

> We will decide it is alive but not understand fully what that means. I don't understand fully what this comment means. If alien life has DNA (chemistry) like ours, we learn that life as we know it either started somewhere and spread or was re-invented. If it doesn't, but is obviously alive (move on its own will, hunts, i dont know) we learn that life can exist with different chemistries. If it's not obviously alive…

The odds that alien life would reinvent DNA are basically nil. If we find DNA based life elsewhere that is a slam-dunk for panspermia.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#185

Post by tibarion » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:38 PM UTC

sAbakumoff wrote: post #102

sydd wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he is one of the admins. And this is not the place for low-effort comments like "me too" or "first!" or "lol"

I found the title funny, it's not a low effort to share this reaction with everyone.

No, it definitely is. I think you should reread the welcome page: https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

"The most important principle on HN, though, is to make thoughtful comments. Thoughtful in both senses: civil and substantial.

The test for substance is a lot like it is for links. Does your comment teach us anything? There are two ways to do that: by pointing out some consideration that hadn't previously been mentioned, and by giving more information about the topic, perhaps from personal experience. Whereas comments like "LOL!" or worse still, "That's retarded!" teach us nothing."

If that doesn't sit right with you then maybe you'll be more comfortable using Reddit or something similar.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#186

Post by sakopov » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:40 PM UTC

vinchuco wrote: post #86

Here is also slime mold 'communicating' their knowledge to other slime mold https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17491547 . For anyone that is fascinated by nature studies and would like to be exposed to more of them rather than the article about the article I can't recommend PNAS enough. Part of what motivated me to continue graduate studies.

Here is an article from 2010 about slime mold building a network which is a more efficient version of the Tokyo subway system [1]. This is absolutely fascinating.

[1] http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/22/brainle...

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#187

Post by koliber » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:45 PM UTC

The question I see is what do we define as language and communicating.

Do we mean that trees can relay information to each other, as well to other species? Sure, that makes sense.

For example, you could make a case that a large tree communicates with the saplings in the underbrush. By shading them, it is letting them know that it is the alpha individual in this area, convincing them not to grow.

We can also say that trees release chemicals that have an effect on surrounding life. This could also be called communication.

Finally, we could say that a loudly creaking tree is communicating to people around it that it is growing old, getting stress fractures, and could break off a branch that could pose a danger.

Any of the above could be considered communications.

To counter this, I could make a case that a truck tire can communicate just as effectively. It can cast a shadow which would prevent vegetation from growing. It could leach chemicals over time which would have an effect on the surrounding life. Finally, it could convey a threat by making loud bumping noises while it is bouncing towards you on a freeway.

Nature is interesting and complex. We continue to discover new and exciting things about how it works. I think anthropomorphising these effects makes them exciting, but does not necessarily add to how we understand them.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#188

Post by koliber » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:48 PM UTC

ianai wrote: post #160

harperlee wrote: post #83

To me, there needs to be a differentiation between communicating and speaking. If you broadcast information and another entity receives it, and uses it, that is not dialogue - just reactions. Even if through an evolutionary game the species reaches effective communication (predators, plagues, etc.), and complex feedback loops emerge, resembling a dialogue, there seems to be something lacking - perhaps the ability to…

I’ve had house cats ask me things plenty. They’ll ask whether they are welcome in my lap by stopping short of stepping on my leg and looking at me for feedback. There’s much more to communication than human spoken word.

Agreed.

I've had dogs communicate with me by angrily running towards me and barking. This conveyed danger and told me to get out of the way.

I've once had a small avalanche do the same as well.

People would call me looney though if I told them that the mountains communicate with me, and I listen.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#189

Post by CuriouslyC » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:48 PM UTC

ckastner wrote: post #4

> Because they relate to the trees as live beings with intimate ties to surrounding people and other creatures, the Waorani aren’t alarmed by the notion that a tree might scream when cut, or surprised that harming a tree should cause trouble for humans. That sounds like textbook anthropomorphizing, and the article seems to follow down that path as well...

I always wondered, why is anthropomorphizing looked upon with such disdain? To me, that attitude smacks of the idea that humans are "special." Additionally, if it really is wrong to generalize from human internal experience to that of animals, logic implies that it is wrong to generalize from a specific human's internal experience to that of any other human. Since we don't seem to want to give up on making sweeping generalizations about humans, we should probably also stop making such a stink about anthropomorphizing.

Finally, anthropormophizing is a useful metaphorical aid to help people understand. I don't think it's a big deal as long as you avoid making absolute teleological claims.

Re: A biologist who believes that trees speak a language we can learn to listen to

#190

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:51 PM UTC

CuriouslyC wrote: post #181

swebs wrote: post #176

>Trees exchange chemicals with fungus, and send seeds—essentially information packets—with wind, birds, bats, and other visitors for delivery around the world. Simard specializes in the underground relationships of trees. Her research shows that below the earth are vast networks of roots working with fungi to move water, carbon, and nutrients among trees of all species. These complex, symbiotic networks mimic human n…

How is a molecule different from a word? How is a spatial and temporal sequence of molecules different from a sentence? I think language, like consciousness, is one of those things that a lot of people have a chauvinistic definition for...

[deleted]