6 ms·
It is so utterly deranged and insane that NYT says plants are making "mournful cries" when the source paper doesn't support that. When I'm hungry the sounds my
by jart 2y ago
It is so utterly deranged and insane that NYT says plants are making "mournful cries" when the source paper doesn't support that. When I'm hungry the sounds my stomach makes on its own isn't me weeping and wailing. When I'm flatulent that sound is not a joyful scream.
- someothherguyy 2y ago> NYT says The author is Gennaro Tomma, a freelance journalist. https://gennarotomma.it/ https://gennarotomma.it/
- echelon 2y agoIf a newspaper publishes something and it isn't under the category "op-ed", that article carries the weight of the paper.
- softwreoutthere 2y agoMeh, publication bashing, IMO.
- someothherguyy 2y agoThe author still wrote it, yet here he is not criticized nor mentioned, the NY Times is. Not many blame a book publisher when disagreeing with a book author, but it is common to do so for news journalism. Why is that?
- insane_dreamer 2y agoit’s a colorful descriptive and the NYT isn’t a scientific journal; calm down
- dd_xplore 2y ago> It is so utterly deranged and insane that NYT says plants are making "mournful cries" when the source paper doesn't support that. When I'm hungry the sounds my stomach makes on its own isn't me weeping and wailing. When I'm flatulent that sound is not a joyful scream. Nytimes has never been reliable
- rfw300 2y agoThe New York Times is relying on their audience's ability to understand that plants are not conscious beings. "Mournful cries" is just an evocative way of describing the auditory signals plants produce under stress—which the article makes clear. I can't understand what's so "deranged and insane" about some stylistic flair.
- Dalewyn 2y ago>plants are not conscious beings. Is that founded on a basis of scientific fact, or Human Superiority Complex?
- richardw 2y agoIt’s a fair assumption because there’s no genetic benefit to being a smart plant. Why would nature make that? Opposable thumbs mean we have the ability to use smarts, so genetics walked the path to consciousness over many generations. A smarter horse is fine and all but not that beneficial. Being faster or stronger or sexier is probably better. Same with a plant: get more nutrients or sunlight. There are cheaper ways than being smart to do that.
- quonn 2y agoRight, but intelligence/smarts and consciousness are not the same.
- richardw 2y agoSee my sibling comment. Neither give any benefit over just sitting there and being a plant.
- techas 2y agoIt is not clear if there is a evolutionary benefit for human to be conscious. Although here we are…
- tripper_27 2y ago
- uoaei 2y agoThey're a pop news outlet, they assume that the average person isn't questioning the nature of sentience on a regular basis.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- cycomanic 2y ago> It is so utterly deranged and insane And you are complaining about use of language? You might disagree with the anthromorphism (a rather common technique) used by the author, but your post is hyperbole. I hope you also realise the irony, as you also use anthromorphism.
- jart 2y agoYou return from a 15 day hiatus to tell me this?
- brushfoot 2y agoAgreed, especially given the idea of plants feeling pain has been used to attempt to discredit or debunk vegetarian ethics—even though it's not true in that sense. Using a poetic descriptor like "mournful" in this context seems out of place.
- pkphilip 2y agoPlants do emit sounds when distressed: https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/plants-emit-ultrasonic-sounds-distress/article66694480.ece https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/plants-emit-ultras...
- beala 2y agoMy car also emits different sounds when it's malfunctioning, but I don't go on to ascribe it an emotional state such as "mournful wailing."