this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
427 points (94.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

30722 readers
2080 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.

~~Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion~~

Edit2: IP= intellectal property

Edit3: sort by controversal

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UndergroundGoblin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

Would you say that cutting a carrot is equal to cut the throat of a cow?

Plants do not have a central nervous system or a brain so they are not able to feel pain or emotions. Animals can feel, dream, have friends, same as we do. Just not as complex.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

If that's the litmus test, then there are certainly animals that aren't sentient and don't meet those requirements. Is it OK to eat animals that do not have brains?

[–] Irelephant@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

Actually, (correct me if i'm wrong) carrots are not dead until you boil/cook them.

^I^ ^love^ ^poking^ ^holes^ ^in^ ^people's^ ^analogies^ ^without^ ^addressing^ ^their^ ^points.^

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

You are also denying oxygen to those cows

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

they are not able to feel pain or emotions

you can't prove that

[–] UndergroundGoblin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Here is my prove: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8052213/

TL;DR: Abstract

Claims that plants have conscious experiences have increased in recent years and have received wide coverage, from the popular media to scientific journals. Such claims are misleading and have the potential to misdirect funding and governmental policy decisions. After defining basic, primary consciousness, we provide new arguments against 12 core claims made by the proponents of plant consciousness. Three important new conclusions of our study are (1) plants have not been shown to perform the proactive, anticipatory behaviors associated with consciousness, but only to sense and follow stimulus trails reactively; (2) electrophysiological signaling in plants serves immediate physiological functions rather than integrative-information processing as in nervous systems of animals, giving no indication of plant consciousness; (3) the controversial claim of classical Pavlovian learning in plants, even if correct, is irrelevant because this type of learning does not require consciousness. Finally, we present our own hypothesis, based on two logical assumptions, concerning which organisms possess consciousness. Our first assumption is that affective (emotional) consciousness is marked by an advanced capacity for operant learning about rewards and punishments. Our second assumption is that image-based conscious experience is marked by demonstrably mapped representations of the external environment within the body. Certain animals fit both of these criteria, but plants fit neither. We conclude that claims for plant consciousness are highly speculative and lack sound scientific support.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

that's not proof they aren't conscious

[–] UndergroundGoblin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

"...plants have not been shown to perform the proactive, anticipatory behaviors associated with consciousness..."

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 14 hours ago

an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence