this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
689 points (83.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26661 readers
4681 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

We don't know how consciousness works enough to say they don't. Having a brain and/or nervous system might not be necessary.

They don't have muscles either, but some plants are known to uproot themselves and fucking move.

[–] strawberrysocial@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Yeah, plants aren't stationary. All plants move, just very, very slowly compared to animals. Looking at time lapse videos of vines growing, reaching out for something to grab on to and stuff is pretty neat. They kind of whip around in circles until they feel they've hit something worth grabbing onto.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Wait that's cool as hell, which plants?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[–] strawberrysocial@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Maybe tumbleweeds? I think..

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

We don’t know how consciousness works enough to say they don’t. Having a brain and/or nervous system might not be necessary.

Hmm sorry but no, there are traits exhibited by conscious entities which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness. This is a nice explainer on consciousness, note that it’s not saying anything about needing a brain to exhibit those traits

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/#DesQueWhaFeaCon

correct me if I am misremembering sth

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 months ago

there are traits exhibited by conscious entities which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness.

Implying we have a way of determining whether an entity is conscious or not. That's the entire point of contention here.

[–] arken@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness.

See what you did there? You assume a priori which entities lack consciousness, and then motivate this by claiming they lack traits that can be observed in conscious entities. That is very neatly circular.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

What you and other people who’re objecting to my comment are saying is that there is no way to define consciousness because we don’t know all the different ways something can be conscious. But that doesn’t matter because these organisms lack the properties which we see in other conscious organisms, ie proprieties we do know about

Here’s what I am saying: consciousness is an emergent property of some discrete biological processes, and we have developed some idea of what consciousness looks like when exhibited by an organism.

So that means that all organisms which are conscious have to exhibit the same properties. You cannot pick and choose which properties to exhibit because then what you’re doing is something else, and not exhibiting consciousness.

Like, if you’re a heart of some sort, you have to exhibit the same activity as a heart in general across all different organisms to be classified as a heart.

It’s possible that same organisms exhibit some parts of consciousness as we have noticed till now, but if those organisms do not exhibit all parts of consciousness then they’re not conscious.

[–] arken@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So, I'm guessing everyone in this thread has a different conception of what "consciousness" actually is and what we're talking about here, which makes it difficult to discuss casually like this. You seem to have a very exclusive definition of consciousness, which only serves to avoid the argument, really. "It’s possible that same organisms exhibit some parts of consciousness as we have noticed till now, but if those organisms do not exhibit all parts of consciousness then they’re not conscious"...you're splitting hairs. If plants could be proven to be aware, have subjective experience, a sense of self, it would be reasonable to change our definition of consciousness to be more inclusive - simply because such a concept of consciousness would be a lot more useful then.

Emergentism is a popular hypothesis, not a fact. Christof Koch lost the bet, remember? The idea that "all organisms which are conscious have to exhibit the same properties" and "you cannot pick and choose" does not logically follow from anything you've said. These are criteria that you set up yourself. Take the idea of qualia as an example, how could we ever observe that an animal or a plant does or does not experience qualia? Nobody solved the problem of other minds.

Consciousness is nothing like a heart; the function of the heart can be observed and measured. How do you know that you possess awareness? You can only experience it. (Actually, that we are aware is the only thing we can know with complete certainty.)

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Er, that’s what I am saying however is that you can observe and measure consciousness.

You seem to have a very exclusive definition of consciousness, which only serves to avoid the argument, really.

I don’t, I am just going based on current findings.

I am not sure why it’s hard to accept that some living things may not be conscious. Viruses propagate “mindlessly”, they’re neither living nor conscious.

I also don’t understand why you think emergent properties are a hypothesis. Emergent properties of biological processes are fact, look at any cell of any major organ in the body. Why do we treat the brain differently? Because I think we get irrational.

[–] arken@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Er, that’s what I am saying however is that you can observe and measure consciousness.

Going with any definition of consciousness relevant to this discussion, say phenomenality and/or awareness, no.

I am not sure why it’s hard to accept that some living things may not be conscious. Viruses propagate “mindlessly”, they’re neither living nor conscious.

That's not really the point - I don't claim to know what entities possess consciousness. The point is that you don't either.

I also don’t understand why you think emergent properties are a hypothesis. Emergent properties of biological processes are fact

Obviously I'm talking about Emergentism as it relates to consciousness, and the idea that consciousness is an emergent property is not a fact, no. And there are perfectly valid reasons - for example, the "explanatory gap" - why someone might find it unsatisfactory.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Okay, I hope you go forth and research these ideas

[–] arken@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I have done plenty of research, thank you. Of course even more research never hurts.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I am interested in knowing if I am wrong, would be cool to see published results which can prove any of these ideas

[–] strawberrysocial@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How will we ever know for sure if plants have their own form of consciousness that doesn't follow a list of requirements that's based on animals, or can feel pain.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But why do you think plants should have some own form of consciousness? All organism which have circulatory systems have generally similarly behaving circulatory systems. So why should consciousness be different?

No, if an organism does not exhibit all properties of consciousness that we see in all other organisms, then it’s not conscious

[–] strawberrysocial@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

I see what you are saying, but maybe you're looking at it from an animal perspective instead of a plant one. They could have consciousness in their own way that's not similar to ours, so we think they are "brainless" or not aware of what's going on. I'm not a scientist but I do wonder about plants. They are living creatures.