Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plants “panic” when it rains

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 92 posts

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#71

Post by Tempest1981 »

codingdave wrote: post #66

"Panic" is an anthropomorphism for what is really going on. Plants react to water. That makes complete sense. Humans react to it when it falls on us as well. Maybe we go inside. Maybe we open an umbrella. Maybe we go dance through the fields and enjoy a summer rain. But whatever we do, they are reactions, not "Panic."

Agreed. But if the headline said "Plants react to water", would anyone read it? Or "Researchers water plants"?

The word "panic" is in quotes, as a simplification of "invoke a defensive and protective reaction", and to get non-scientists to read a science article... not a terrible thing.

Edit: the original article does not quote "panic", but Professor Harvey Millar uses the word, so not clickbait?

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#72

Post by JoeAltmaier »

Enginerrrd wrote: post #70
codingdave wrote: post #66

"Panic" is an anthropomorphism for what is really going on. Plants react to water. That makes complete sense. Humans react to it when it falls on us as well. Maybe we go inside. Maybe we open an umbrella. Maybe we go dance through the fields and enjoy a summer rain. But whatever we do, they are reactions, not "Panic."

While I mostly agree with you, I just want to play devil's advocate here a little bit. Plants and fungi have some very complex interactive networks capable of various forms of individual, inter-individual, and inter-species communication and intelligent decision making. From our perspective though, these interactions and decisions play out over some very different time scales from our own cognition. Suppose for a sec…

Time scale isn't enough to prevent us from recognizing intelligence and cognition in trees (I can't speak for the trees recognizing us). Look at their works, their accomplishments, their cooperative social organization. They've had a long, long time to show us that.

Oh! They've done nothing! No tribes nor social exchanges - never even mention hospitals and lasers and money and law...

No, trees are not sentient, intelligent nor exhibiting cognition.

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#73

Post by dmos62 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #72
Enginerrrd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I mostly agree with you, I just want to play devil's advocate here a little bit. Plants and fungi have some very complex interactive networks capable of various forms of individual, inter-individual, and inter-species communication and intelligent decision making. From our perspective though, these interactions and decisions play out over some very different time scales from our own cognition. Suppose for a sec…

Time scale isn't enough to prevent us from recognizing intelligence and cognition in trees (I can't speak for the trees recognizing us). Look at their works, their accomplishments, their cooperative social organization. They've had a long, long time to show us that. Oh! They've done nothing! No tribes nor social exchanges - never even mention hospitals and lasers and money and law... No, trees are not sentient, intel…

You seem to use sentience as a synonym for human intelligence. Works, accomplishments, cooperation: if you don't see those things when you leave the city, you're (forgive the hyperbole) blind.

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#74

Post by JoeAltmaier »

dmos62 wrote: post #73
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time scale isn't enough to prevent us from recognizing intelligence and cognition in trees (I can't speak for the trees recognizing us). Look at their works, their accomplishments, their cooperative social organization. They've had a long, long time to show us that. Oh! They've done nothing! No tribes nor social exchanges - never even mention hospitals and lasers and money and law... No, trees are not sentient, intel…

You seem to use sentience as a synonym for human intelligence. Works, accomplishments, cooperation: if you don't see those things when you leave the city, you're (forgive the hyperbole) blind.

Trees compete viciously for sunlight, soil, water. They strangle one another, poison one another, create seeds that poison animals, and on and on.

But its all consistent with vegetable blind optimization for their environment.

As for social organization, works, cooperation - the fact that they grow in a group and are impressively big says nothing about their sentience.

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#75

Post by orthecreedence »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #74
dmos62 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to use sentience as a synonym for human intelligence. Works, accomplishments, cooperation: if you don't see those things when you leave the city, you're (forgive the hyperbole) blind.

Trees compete viciously for sunlight, soil, water. They strangle one another, poison one another, create seeds that poison animals, and on and on. But its all consistent with vegetable blind optimization for their environment. As for social organization, works, cooperation - the fact that they grow in a group and are impressively big says nothing about their sentience.

You're using human metrics for accomplishments and applying them to a completely difference class of organism ("lol do trees even have a fiat currency banking system?!"). I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I'm saying you have no idea whether trees are sentient, how they experience the world, or what kind of intelligence they posess, and you cannot determine any of these qualities by comparing them to humans.

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#76

Post by Lendal »

codingdave wrote: post #66

"Panic" is an anthropomorphism for what is really going on. Plants react to water. That makes complete sense. Humans react to it when it falls on us as well. Maybe we go inside. Maybe we open an umbrella. Maybe we go dance through the fields and enjoy a summer rain. But whatever we do, they are reactions, not "Panic."

It's not just any reaction. Your reaction to seeing a flower is not the same as your reaction to rocks falling on your head. To call this a "reaction" would be to pointedly understate what is occurring.

There are different words that could have been used, like "alarm" for instance. But to leave it at "reaction" would be leaving out important details of the story that could otherwise be conveyed in a single word better than just "to react".

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#77

Post by 8bitsrule »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #72
Enginerrrd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I mostly agree with you, I just want to play devil's advocate here a little bit. Plants and fungi have some very complex interactive networks capable of various forms of individual, inter-individual, and inter-species communication and intelligent decision making. From our perspective though, these interactions and decisions play out over some very different time scales from our own cognition. Suppose for a sec…

Time scale isn't enough to prevent us from recognizing intelligence and cognition in trees (I can't speak for the trees recognizing us). Look at their works, their accomplishments, their cooperative social organization. They've had a long, long time to show us that. Oh! They've done nothing! No tribes nor social exchanges - never even mention hospitals and lasers and money and law... No, trees are not sentient, intel…

No grifting, fraud, hoaxes, deceptions, violence, dishonesty -never even mention atom bombs, firethrowers, IEDs ... Clearly not sentient.

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#78

Post by erikpukinskis »

kris-s wrote: post #4

What is described in the article doesn't fit the definition of panic. I'm torn because maybe I wouldn't have read the article without the needless anthropomorphization. Plants are awesome and interesting to me because they're so planty and not animaly.

Is there a term for the opposite of anthropomorphization? I.e. an unwillingness to acknowledge equivalencies between humans and other species due to a presumption of “human exceptionalism”?

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#79

Post by erikpukinskis »

las_balas_tres wrote: post #28
kris-s wrote: post #4

What is described in the article doesn't fit the definition of panic. I'm torn because maybe I wouldn't have read the article without the needless anthropomorphization. Plants are awesome and interesting to me because they're so planty and not animaly.

I agree. The word "panic" to me implies a certain mental state. Something plants lack.

Given plants utilize electrical signals I don’t see how you could argue they don’t have “mental states”?

Re: Plants “panic” when it rains

#80

Post by tempguy9999 »

orthecreedence wrote: post #75
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trees compete viciously for sunlight, soil, water. They strangle one another, poison one another, create seeds that poison animals, and on and on. But its all consistent with vegetable blind optimization for their environment. As for social organization, works, cooperation - the fact that they grow in a group and are impressively big says nothing about their sentience.

You're using human metrics for accomplishments and applying them to a completely difference class of organism ("lol do trees even have a fiat currency banking system?!"). I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I'm saying you have no idea whether trees are sentient, how they experience the world, or what kind of intelligence they posess, and you cannot determine any of these qualities by comparing them to humans.

"Brainless fungi trade resources with plants like a stock market"

"In soils across the world, fungi trade resources with the plants they colonise in a mutually beneficial relationship. But it turns out the fungi are savvy traders, taking advantage of their partners by shuttling goods to nutrient-starved areas where plants are willing to pay more than usual"

(from https://www.newscientist.com/article/2205604-brainless-fungi...)

FYI. Sort of relevant.

Post reply on HN