On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 07:34:34 -0700, Jim Clark wrote:
Seems that a lot here hinges on what the word "know" means.
For some reason this statement reminds me of Bill Clinton when he said "It depends upon what the meaning of 'is" is..." For those who don't know or have forgotten or are actively repressing any memories from that period of time, see the Wiki entry for a refresher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton So, let me put forward a "hypothetical": a person is infected by a flu virus. It initiates an attack by the immune system which produces antibodies to either eliminate the virus or put it into a state where it can no longer attack the body. Question: Is this "memory"? Depending upon one's medical knowledge this may sound like an odd question because our subjective experience of memories (cognitive) represent a completely different system. Then again, there are those with a different view; see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_immune_system#Immunological_memory What does "memory" mean? Oh, that reminds me, I need to buy a new hard drive to back-up files on my PC --- I'm running out of memory.
Does the response of an object to any treatment warrant the label?
Is there some logical system or calculus that will allow us to unambiguously answer this question? Or does it depend upon one's subjective definition or agreement with a group convention?
Or does "know" imply something else, like awareness.
I don't think so, especially given that social cognitive psychologies have shown how often human responses in social and non-social situations are done unconsciously, priming effects in an almost "stimulus-response" situation. Even if were to concede the operation of "awareness" or "consciousness" one is stuck with the problem that Sir John Eccles had in describing consciousness as "consciousness1", "consciousness2", "consciousness3", and so on.
Even "they fight back" seems like a provocative and perhaps unjustified wording, although not as egregious as "know."
Again, are you appealing to some abstract logical system or subjectivity or social consensus for what these words mean?
Does an organism or object reacting imply "fighting back?"
If an immune system generate antibodies in response to a virus, is it "fighting back"? Or does your immune system have an awareness that our brain's awareness is not aware of?
If I throw a rock up in the air, is it "fighting back" against gravity when it falls to the ground?
Metaphorically or literally? If "fighting back" mean "working in opposition", then when anything is thrown away from a large body, like a rock into the air from the surface of a planet, isn't working in opposition to gravity? With enough opposition it might even escape the clutches of gravity and go out into space with it will be attracted by the gravitational forces of other large bodies.
Silly example, but does illustrate that "fighting back" does not apply to all reactions of objects.
Metaphorically or literally? Or should we avoid the whole problem of using natural language and simply create a compute simulation where we can operationally define "fighting back" by referring to the operation of specific code?
Question is whether the reactions of plants to being eaten are more akin to the rock or to some animate object that can "fight back" and perhaps "know."
Hmmmm, sounds like you think words have Buddha Nature. For one view on what this means, see: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfoxzen/2013/11/do-words-have-buddha-nature-fighting-over-and-gnawing-at-rotting-bones-crunch-snap-howl-bark.html Btw. Mu! -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu On October-30-16 6:55 AM, Mike Palij wrote:
Plants apparently respond to "attacks" on them, such as eating them. For a couple of examples. see: http://daily.jstor.org/plants-know-when-they-are-being-eaten-and-they-fight-back/ There is an old story in Zen Buddhism about all living things having Buddha nature and it is a sin to kill and eat, say, animals, because of this. But one day a novice asked a master about plants and whether they had Buddha nature. The mater responded "All living things have Buddha nature". The novice responded "So when we eats plant, they scream as we eat them?' The master responded "Yes, but they do so very quietly." In contrast, on the Zombie series "The Walking Dead" Carl makes the astute observation: "Everything is food for something else." Yes, indeed.
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=49800 or send a blank email to leave-49800-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
