
The Intelligence of Plants - Hooke
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2019/09/26/the-intelligence-of-plants/
======
taneq
> Richard Fortey, a former professor of paleobiology at Oxford and
> paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in London, scorns the idea of
> “smart plants.” “It’s so anthropomorphized that it’s really not helpful,” he
> told Smithsonian. “Trees do not have will or intention. They solve problems,
> but it’s all under hormonal control, and it all evolved through natural
> selection.” These “magical” notions of plant intelligence are worrisome, he
> says, because people “immediately leap to faulty conclusions, namely that
> trees are sentient beings like us.”

“It’s so anthropomorphized that it’s really not helpful. Richard Fortey does
not have will or intention. He solves problems, but it’s all under hormonal
control, and it all evolved through natural selection. These “magical” notions
of Fortey's intelligence are worrisome, because people immediately leap to
faulty conclusions, namely that Richard Fortey is a sentient being like us.”

~~~
hammock
I'm not so sure about that. Animals of all kinds can be "smart" \- why does he
assume "smart plants" is a comparison to humans?

------
bananatron
It's kind of interesting how we often use the word intelligence to mean
'experiencing the world like a human.' When we find beings who's experience
inches closer to us, we respect them more.

------
foobar_
Proof by metaphors and analogy is intellectual fraud.

------
aiexplorations
Fascinating piece. The rider provided there lest we imagine glorious things
about plant intelligence is interesting:

"Richard Fortey, a former professor of paleobiology at Oxford and
paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in London, scorns the idea of
“smart plants.” “It’s so anthropomorphized that it’s really not helpful,” he
told Smithsonian. “Trees do not have will or intention. They solve problems,
but it’s all under hormonal control, and it all evolved through natural
selection.” These “magical” notions of plant intelligence are worrisome, he
says, because people “immediately leap to faulty conclusions, namely that
trees are sentient beings like us.” "

------
docgonzo
This is wild extrapolation from Dr. Gagliano's already controversial results
[0]. Her findings are interesting [1]. Our own immune system has memory and
responds to its environment [2 and 3]; does that make it intelligent. The
bioacoustics work [1] is way out of my expertise, but is non the less
interesting and compelling. I have not kept up with it to see how well it has
held up. Dr. Gagliano has some strange opinions and her work is often subject
to these kinds of extrapolations. [0]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214474](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214474)
[1]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22445066](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22445066)
[2]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27158/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27158/)
[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunological_memory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunological_memory)

------
AtomicOrbital
interesting observation by Suzanne Simard and others like Paul Stamets is a
group of deciduous trees when fully shaded by taller conifer trees is
mysteriously happy and healthy which because shaded should not happen. After
many months of investigation a different stand of deciduous trees relatively
far away who are in full sunlight where the source of nutrients conveyed over
to the shaded trees by an underground mycelium network ... in effect the
underground fungi where farming the trees ... keeping the forest healthy in
effort to have more food in the future

------
tudorw
Perhaps Jeremy Narby will have his day :)

