Evolution of Mind

[Subduction Zone]

Not at all what do you actually know about the biology of Plants. What facts can you produce? Do you understand how they find water and food, react to environmental changes, reproduce or evolve. Have you studied them to the point that you can eliminate the possibility of intelligence or do you just find the argument wrong.

I was honest in my post. I have read several articles and research paper's concerning plant intelligence and there is no scientific consensus has of yet but it is trending that way. What information do you have that indicates differently?

I am not the one making a positive claim when it comes to plant consciousness. And you are asking improper questions here. You have an assumption within your question. I do not need to eliminate intelligence, you need to find evidence for it. The fact that plants react to their environment is not indicative of either intelligence or consciousness.

All I ask for is valid evidence and you can't seem to supply any. If I claimed that Bigfoot was real and then demanded that you do all of the homework would you take my claim seriously or would you laugh at it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

there are no absolutes in science. things are by degrees/percentages. if we have no evidence to the contrary, then the evidence we have from objective research is the best it's going to get.

No, just no.

 

[Subduction Zone]

so consciousness without self-awareness isn't conscious to you? or are you confusing conscience with conscious?

because my understanding of conscious is aware of something. being self aware could mean more than a visual. blind people couldn't be self aware using the mirror test.

And this demonstrates another lack of the protagonists here. I have asked for a definition of terms. None has been forthcoming. If you are using a different definition than the standard ones then you need to make your definition clear. In fact since many of the terms that have been used have more than one definition you still need to make your definitions clear.

This is a basic in any claim. Running away from that duty indicates that we are merely being sold woo and nonsense.

 

[idav]

so consciousness without self-awareness isn't conscious to you? or are you confusing conscience with conscious?

because my understanding of conscious is aware of something. being self aware could mean more than a visual. blind people couldn't be self aware using the mirror test.

I think what your asking about is qualia, consiousness is asking about "awareness" of its surroundings. Machines can be aware of their surroundings and show more intelligence than humans but there would still be a question as to whether it feels it's environment.

 

[Fool]

That's not even how science works. Humans basically are the creature of the present. We lack capability to examine the past, and we lack capability to examine the future. Science can be accurate because it's about how something can repeat infinitive number of times for us to speculate, to observe and most importantly to predict how it repeats to get to a conclusion.

Absolute Truth, Dogmatism Antithetical to Science - The Tech

 

[Fool]

And this demonstrates another lack of the protagonists here. I have asked for a definition of terms. None has been forthcoming. If you are using a different definition than the standard ones then you need to make your definition clear. In fact since many of the terms that have been used have more than one definition you still need to make your definitions clear.

This is a basic in any claim. Running away from that duty indicates that we are merely being sold woo and nonsense.

consciousness is awareness of things, not necessarily of self or other things but awareness of a thing, or things.

having an awareness of pain, stimulation, is awareness of a thing about self.

having an awareness of things apart from self as food as foe is also consciousness

 

[bobhikes]

I am not the one making a positive claim when it comes to plant consciousness. And you are asking improper questions here. You have an assumption within your question. I do not need to eliminate intelligence, you need to find evidence for it. The fact that plants react to their environment is not indicative of either intelligence or consciousness.

All I ask for is valid evidence and you can't seem to supply any. If I claimed that Bigfoot was real and then demanded that you do all of the homework would you take my claim seriously or would you laugh at it?

Personally, I think an unknown Large creature could exist in the woods but once it is found science would label it and deny that it was bigfoot. I'm a hiker and hunted in New Jersey there are 10's of 1000's of Deer throughout the state but in hunting season try to find one. There are few thousand bear in the state. On my many Hikes I rarely see a deer and have never seen a bear. If the creature was intelligent it could remain hidden.

 

[bobhikes]

I am not the one making a positive claim when it comes to plant consciousness. And you are asking improper questions here. You have an assumption within your question. I do not need to eliminate intelligence, you need to find evidence for it. The fact that plants react to their environment is not indicative of either intelligence or consciousness.

All I ask for is valid evidence and you can't seem to supply any. If I claimed that Bigfoot was real and then demanded that you do all of the homework would you take my claim seriously or would you laugh at it?

Some Facts, I know they are human but bigfoot is not a stretch. Wilkapedia(quick reference)

In 2013 it was estimated that there were more than 100 uncontacted tribes around the world, mostly in the densely forested areas of South America, Central Africa, and New Guinea.[4] Knowledge of the existence of these groups comes mostly from infrequent and sometimes violent encounters with neighboring tribes, and from aerial footage.

As of 2006, the presence of five uncontacted groups was confirmed in Bolivia; three more uncontacted groups are believed to exist

On January 18, 2007, FUNAI reported that it had confirmed the presence of 67 uncontacted tribes in Brazil, up from 40 in 2005

 

[Subduction Zone]

consciousness is awareness of things, not necessarily of self or other things but awareness of a thing, or things.

having an awareness of pain, stimulation, is awareness of a thing about self.

having an awareness of things apart from self as food as foe is also consciousness

Sorry, but you have merely added another undefined term. Just because there is a reaction in an organism that does not imply "awareness". By your definition plants are not either aware or conscious yet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Some Facts, I know they are human but bigfoot is not a stretch. Wilkapedia(quick reference)

In 2013 it was estimated that there were more than 100 uncontacted tribes around the world, mostly in the densely forested areas of South America, Central Africa, and New Guinea.[4] Knowledge of the existence of these groups comes mostly from infrequent and sometimes violent encounters with neighboring tribes, and from aerial footage.

As of 2006, the presence of five uncontacted groups was confirmed in Bolivia; three more uncontacted groups are believed to exist

On January 18, 2007, FUNAI reported that it had confirmed the presence of 67 uncontacted tribes in Brazil, up from 40 in 2005

Bad analogy. Brazil is not as nearly well explored as the U.S.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Absolute Truth, Dogmatism Antithetical to Science - The Tech

Why did you post that link? Were you bound and determined to demonstrate that you did not understand the correction?

 

[bobhikes]

Bad analogy. Brazil is not as nearly well explored as the U.S.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/trav...ilderness-area-state-national-forest/6861737/

From the Article
here are currently more than 750 such areas in the National Wilderness Preservation System comprising over 109 million acres -- roughly 5% of the United States by area. Need a refresher from the other 95%? The Active Times picked 10 wild places in the lower 48 states that are truly wild. Not all are federally protected wilderness, but all are places where "man is a visitor" -- you included.

 

[atanu]

What makes you think that plants and bacteria have consciousness? Perhaps you better define your terms. You may be using your own definition. By the definition that most people use they do not have consciousness.

Can you please provide this definition and the references thereof?

.... If you are using a different definition than the standard ones then you need to make your definition clear. I....

Again, can you help by actually stating or referring the standard ones?

 

[bobhikes]

Can you please provide this definition and the references thereof?

Beware the hamster wheel he doesn't have to provide information as the burden of proof is on those that make the claim.

 

[atanu]

Beware the hamster wheel he doesn't have to provide information as the burden of proof is on those that make the claim.

Yeah.

But I am not asking for a proof. I am requesting references so that I can understand his position.

 

[bobhikes]

Yeah.

But I am not asking for a proof. I am requesting references so that I can understand his position.

Best of Luck, I would be interested as well.

 

[Fool]

Sorry, but you have merely added another undefined term. Just because there is a reaction in an organism that does not imply "awareness". By your definition plants are not either aware or conscious yet.

Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary

 

[atanu]

The mind is a dynamic thing. In fact it's an idea, that doesn't have a static form per se. Some see it as being attached to a brain but that isn't necessarily so for plants and bacteria that have consciousness.

As a species wouldn't a mind have to adapt its belief system to represent it's current state because of a change in the environment?

And if it did change, how would it be changed?

I will give another perspective.

We assume multiplicity as reality and then try to determine whether this object or that object is conscious. This is fundamentally wrong, since we are superimposing a multiplicity on a non dual unitive reality called consciousness.

Awareness can be of subject or of object. For example, I am aware of my self and I am aware of the tree. In all situations, you will find that all that is known directly or indirectly through report, are permeated by awareness.

So, to talk about aware 'This' or aware 'that' is an error, from Vedantic perspective. This perspective can be better studied through explanation of a sage:

http://www.discovervedanta.com/downloads/articles/definition-of-consciousness.pdf
.................................

Therefore, as per Vedanta, we can better understand evolution of mind, if we grasp the non dual nature of consciousness itself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/trav...ilderness-area-state-national-forest/6861737/

From the Article
here are currently more than 750 such areas in the National Wilderness Preservation System comprising over 109 million acres -- roughly 5% of the United States by area. Need a refresher from the other 95%? The Active Times picked 10 wild places in the lower 48 states that are truly wild. Not all are federally protected wilderness, but all are places where "man is a visitor" -- you included.

You are merely cherry picking. The reports of bigfoot tend to be in areas that are almost "urban" compared to Brazil's jungles.

When comparing things make sure that they are similar. Bigfoot tends to be reported in the lower 48, and usually relatively close to civilization.

Instead of defending a failed analogy it would have been much wiser to see if there was actual evidence for your beliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary

Are you trying to prove how wrong you are? Yo are succeeding.