对植物知觉的批判性评述:超越传统方法

IF 1.7 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Biology & Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1
Mads Jørgensen Hansen
{"title":"对植物知觉的批判性评述:超越传统方法","authors":"Mads Jørgensen Hansen","doi":"10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Are plants sentient? Several researchers argue that plants might be sentient. They do so on the grounds that plants exhibit cognitive behaviour similar to that of sentient organisms and that they possess a vascular system which is functionally equivalent to the animal nervous system. This paper will not attempt to settle the issue of plant sentience. Instead, the paper has two goals. First, it provides a diagnosis of the current state of the debate on plant sentience. It is argued that the current state of the debate on plant sentience cannot yield any progress because the behavioural and physiological similarities pointed to as a way of inferring consciousness are not, in themselves, indicative of consciousness. Second, the paper proposes we adopt the theory-light approach proposed by Birch (Noûs 56(1):133–153, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12351) whereby we start to test for clusters of cognitive abilities facilitated by consciousness in plants. Currently, there are no such tests and therefore no evidence for plant sentience. The paper proposes that the task for future research on plants be in line with the tests outlined in the theory-light approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":55368,"journal":{"name":"Biology & Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical review of plant sentience: moving beyond traditional approaches\",\"authors\":\"Mads Jørgensen Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Are plants sentient? Several researchers argue that plants might be sentient. They do so on the grounds that plants exhibit cognitive behaviour similar to that of sentient organisms and that they possess a vascular system which is functionally equivalent to the animal nervous system. This paper will not attempt to settle the issue of plant sentience. Instead, the paper has two goals. First, it provides a diagnosis of the current state of the debate on plant sentience. It is argued that the current state of the debate on plant sentience cannot yield any progress because the behavioural and physiological similarities pointed to as a way of inferring consciousness are not, in themselves, indicative of consciousness. Second, the paper proposes we adopt the theory-light approach proposed by Birch (Noûs 56(1):133–153, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12351) whereby we start to test for clusters of cognitive abilities facilitated by consciousness in plants. Currently, there are no such tests and therefore no evidence for plant sentience. The paper proposes that the task for future research on plants be in line with the tests outlined in the theory-light approach.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biology & Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biology & Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology & Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

植物有知觉吗?一些研究人员认为,植物可能是有知觉的。他们这样做的理由是,植物表现出与有知觉生物类似的认知行为,而且它们拥有与动物神经系统功能相当的血管系统。本文并不试图解决植物有知觉的问题。相反,本文有两个目标。首先,本文对有关植物知觉的争论现状进行了分析。本文认为,目前关于植物知觉的争论无法取得任何进展,因为作为推断意识的一种方法而指出的行为和生理相似性本身并不能说明意识。其次,本文建议我们采用伯奇(Noûs 56(1):133-153, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12351)提出的 "轻理论"(theory-light)方法,即开始测试植物中由意识促进的认知能力群。目前,还没有此类测试,因此也没有证据表明植物具有知觉能力。本文建议,未来植物研究的任务应与 "理论之光 "方法中概述的测试相一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A critical review of plant sentience: moving beyond traditional approaches

Are plants sentient? Several researchers argue that plants might be sentient. They do so on the grounds that plants exhibit cognitive behaviour similar to that of sentient organisms and that they possess a vascular system which is functionally equivalent to the animal nervous system. This paper will not attempt to settle the issue of plant sentience. Instead, the paper has two goals. First, it provides a diagnosis of the current state of the debate on plant sentience. It is argued that the current state of the debate on plant sentience cannot yield any progress because the behavioural and physiological similarities pointed to as a way of inferring consciousness are not, in themselves, indicative of consciousness. Second, the paper proposes we adopt the theory-light approach proposed by Birch (Noûs 56(1):133–153, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12351) whereby we start to test for clusters of cognitive abilities facilitated by consciousness in plants. Currently, there are no such tests and therefore no evidence for plant sentience. The paper proposes that the task for future research on plants be in line with the tests outlined in the theory-light approach.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biology & Philosophy
Biology & Philosophy 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Recent decades have witnessed fascinating and controversial advances in the biological sciences. This journal answers the need for meta-theoretical analysis, both about the very nature of biology, as well as about its social implications. Biology and Philosophy is aimed at a broad readership, drawn from both the sciences and the humanities. The journal subscribes to no specific school of biology, nor of philosophy, and publishes work from authors of all persuasions and all disciplines. The editorial board reflects this attitude in its composition and its world-wide membership. Each issue of Biology and Philosophy carries one or more discussions or comparative reviews, permitting the in-depth study of important works and topics.
期刊最新文献
Environmental interference Trait-centered vs. fitness-centered definitions of natural selection Exploration and perspectival modelling with model organisms: developmental biology as a case study The evolution of reproductive characters: an organismal-relational approach Different kinds of data: samples and the relational framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1