科學家們正在爭論記憶、意識和交流等概念是否可以應用於動物界之外, “The Light Eaters: How the Unseen World of Plant Intelligence Offers a New Understanding of Life on Earth.” 。動物的內在生活比我們想像的要豐富得多。

 大西洋

 ·

佐伊·施蘭格 (Zoë Schlanger) 在我們 2024 年 6 月號中寫道，科學家們正在爭論記憶、意識和交流等概念是否可以應用於動物界之外。

施蘭格在一篇改編自她著作的文章中寫道：「意識曾被視為人類的專利，以及少數明顯有意圖的非人類動物。」文章名為《食光者：看不見的植物智能世界如何提供新的理解》地球上的生命」。 https://theatln.tc/vBeRw3PB

「然而，似乎無論研究人員如何觀察，他們都發現動物的內在生活比我們想像的要豐富得多。科學家現在經常討論動物的認知；他們研究單一動物的行為，並偶爾賦予它們個性。現在一些科學家認為植物也應該被視為具有智慧。

「不久前，在這個領域即使是輕輕踏足，都可能顛覆一名科學家的職業生涯，」施蘭格繼續說道。 1973 年暢銷書《植物的秘密生活》包含了真實的科學，但也包含非常不科學的投射；施蘭格寫道，許多科學家無法重現主張，導致數十年來人們一直迴避植物行為研究。

十年後，華盛頓大學動物學家和化學家戴維·羅德斯（David Rhoades）在論文中提出，樹木之間可以透過相互交流來抵禦毛蟲的侵擾。羅茲受到同行的嘲笑；他的發現最終被埋沒了，儘管它開闢了新的研究方向。

施蘭格寫道：“四十年過去了，植物可能有意地相互交流的想法在植物學中仍然是一個有爭議的概念。”溝通的定義很模糊；意向性則更難表現出來。

植物智慧的本質問題是“沒有大腦的生物如何協調對刺激的反應？”施蘭格繼續說。 「有關世界的資訊如何轉化為有利於植物的行動？如果沒有一個集中的地方來解析這些信息，植物如何感知世界？為了了解更多信息，她與研究植物機構、記憶和其他研究途徑的科學家進行了交談。

閱讀更多：https://theatln.tc/vBeRw3PB

The Atlantic 

Scientists are debating whether concepts such as memory, consciousness, and communication can be applied beyond the animal kingdom, Zoë Schlanger wrote in our June 2024 issue.

“Consciousness was once seen as belonging solely to humans and a short list of nonhuman animals that clearly act with intention,” Schlanger wrote in an article adapted from her book, “The Light Eaters: How the Unseen World of Plant Intelligence Offers a New Understanding of Life on Earth.” https://theatln.tc/vBeRw3PB

“Yet seemingly everywhere researchers look, they are finding that there is more to the inner lives of animals than we ever thought possible. Scientists now talk regularly about animal cognition; they study the behaviors of individual animals, and occasionally ascribe personalities to them. Some scientists now posit that plants should likewise be considered intelligent.”

“Not so long ago, treading even lightly in this domain could upend a scientist’s career,” Schlanger continued. The popular 1973 book “The Secret Life of Plants” included real science, but also featured wildly unscientific projection; many scientists were unable to reproduce its claims, Schlanger wrote, causing a decades-long avoidance of plant-behavior studies.

A decade later, a paper by David Rhoades, a zoologist and chemist at the University of Washington, proposed that trees were communicating with one another to defend against a caterpillar infestation. Rhoades was ridiculed by peers; his discovery ended up buried, even as it opened new lines of inquiry.

“Four decades on, the idea that plants might communicate intentionally with one another remains a controversial concept in botany,” Schlanger wrote. Definitions of communication are slippery; intentionality is even harder to show.

The essential question of plant intelligence is “How does something without a brain coordinate a response to stimuli?” Schlanger continued. “How does information about the world get translated into action that benefits the plant? How can the plant sense its world without a centralized place to parse that information?” To learn more, she spoke with scientists studying plant agency, memory, and other avenues of research.

Read more: https://theatln.tc/vBeRw3PB

所有心情：

492492