Plant Morality / Ethics: Plant Abuse?

[Lay Vegan]

Can you mention a specific question that was ignored? I have seen no reference until now of any question that was ignored.

Here are a few examples of the many valid questions you flippantly dismissed.

Second of all, yes, sentience originates in the brain.
It's very clear how and when it does. Neuroscience isn't dubious about it.
Every organism that doesn't have a central nervous system (brain) isn't sentient. How so?

Where would information be processed and interpreted if not in the brain? How do we get knowledge of anything? Does the bacteria store our knowledge, thoughts, and wants?
Why does the brain even exist?

Such questions are seeking to confirm an assumption about the origin of consciousness but do not provide evidence. I can understand why it may occur as evident that consciousness originates in the brain but humans who live with 10% brain tissue clearly show that something other than brains may be at play.

Here also, the mere consideration is demanded. It is not justified to hide behind the argument that the 'status quo of science' argues that consciousness originates in the brain.

Can you please address my paragraph about astrology, and the questions I asked?
Can you answer if you believe that meat is healthy, because doctors say so (a much bigger amount than the ones advocating for plants' sentience)?
Can you answer if you believe the Earth is flat, because some scientists say so?
If no, why not?

This topic isn't about me or what I believe. It would be irrelevant what I believe. This topic is not intended to argue that plants are in fact sentient. The mere plausibility of the consideration that it may in fact be the case, is used as basis for ethical consideration and the notion that there may be a factor that could potentially have an impact on plant well-being and for nature to prosper.

You seem to lack a grasp of the most basic concepts necessary to hold this kind of discussion. You don’t seem to understand intelligence, sentience, or scientific consensus. You aren't capable of providing evidence that plants are sentient, nor can you grasp why posting a handful of cherry-picked links to random quacks isn't valid scientific proof. Any effort to address your Gish gallop is either dismissed or met with repeatedly debunked assertions. This kind of on-topic assertion spamming is probably what got you banned from whatever forum you came from, and it will get you banned from here too if you keep spamming the forum without answering those questions.

If you either don’t understand those questions, or aren’t capable of answering them (which is the most likely the scenario) then you need to go back to the drawing board and make an effort to understand the underlying concepts they’re framed around.

[brimstoneSalad]

Can you mention a specific question that was ignored? I have seen no reference until now of any question that was ignored.

Dodging a question isn't answering it. Click on page one, press control and f on your keyboard, then type a question mark in the field. That will highlight all of the questions with question marks. Copy them. Then do the same on page two and page three and so on (depending on how many posts you have set per page). Once you finish, answer completely and honestly (rather than dodge or dismiss) all of those questions asked by people other than yourself.

It should be pretty easy to do. If you do not do this you will have to be banned and it will have absolutely nothing to do with WHAT you're discussing and everything to do with HOW you're discussing (or rather not discussing) in violation of forum rules.

If you are sincere and you want to learn, a large part of that is Socratic debate, and that requires that you answer questions. Nobody is asking you your home address or what color underwear you have on -- all of the questions being asked of you here are philosophically relevant questions, including when they come to your beliefs. Sometimes it's not immediately obvious what the purpose of the question is or where it's going, and that's fine -- just answer them, and it will become clear in time with the follow-up questions and explanation.

[Your_Construct]

Hi plant,

As far as I can tell, plants are not self-aware and cannot suffer. For whatever reason, plants have evolved to replicate by not running away. Plants appear to be biological "programs". I don't know if you play computer games but they are very sophisticated these days. You can talk to "characters" in a game and they will respond to you intelligently. However, these intelligent responses are simply algorithms. There is no self-awareness or consciousness behind them. They are programs. You can kill a character in a game, but since there is no self-awareness there is no true suffering.

My view on this might change in the future, but as of now, I believe it is morally acceptable to eat plants. I think what might be perceived as intelligence in plants is nothing more than a programmed response.

[plant]

Can you mention a specific question that was ignored? I have seen no reference until now of any question that was ignored.

Dodging a question isn't answering it.

If you cannot mention a specific question that was ignored then your acquisition is likely not to hold much content. I have refuted your claim repeatedly. I did reply, but I did so in a way to make it very clear that I did not want that the subject were to be turned onto me: this topic is not about me or what I believe, nor was it intended to preach or argue that plants are sentient, nor was the topic intended to question the plausibility of veganism.

[snip - content removed for repetition]

Off-topic: I noticed that you reached 10,000 posts. Congratulations!

10000.png

[brimstoneSalad]

Can you mention a specific question that was ignored? I have seen no reference until now of any question that was ignored.

Dodging a question isn't answering it.

If you cannot mention a specific question that was ignored then your acquisition is likely not to hold much content.

I don't think you've refuted anything. Multiple users have complained of you dodging questions or ignoring them. Like I said, go back and do a search for "?" and answer all of them. Shouldn't be too hard.

I did reply, but I did so in a way to make it very clear that I did not want that the subject were to be turned onto me: this topic is not about me or what I believe

If you believe what you are saying and not trolling, then it very much IS about what you believe if we are to help you understand why your beliefs are inconsistent. You have an apparent double standard when it comes to evidence, and when it comes to a topic of epistemology that is a very important thing to discuss.

nor was it intended to preach or argue that plants are sentient,

I don't really care what you say your intent was, your claims were pretty clear on their own and people have been arguing against them and attempting to use the Socratic method to show you why you are wrong -- that won't work if you don't answer simple questions.

You need to answer those questions before you post more arguments on this topic. Your beliefs and ideas aren't being censored, you're being required to uphold a certain standard for argumentation and forbidden from spam-posting the same thing repeatedly in response without answering people's questions to further the discussion.
This has nothing to do with *what* you're arguing and everything to do with *how* you're arguing.

I hope you'll answer the questions asked of you, but if not you'll have to let this topic go.

[plant]

You have deleted my valid reply to @Your_Construct and left only the part about your false accusation. That is not fair.

Information is being suppressed.

It appears that you are using a lowly tactic in an attempt to frustrate the discussion. From the earliest replies it appears that you have been seeking for a way to 'attack the messenger'.

Even in the case that the information that I shared is invalid, there should be no reason to delete it like that. A supposed ignored question that you are unable to reference is certainly not going to justify your behavior. Your motive to accuse me has been put into question several times and to settle the matter I asked for a reference to the questions that I supposedly had ignored. I even added "once more, please".

Your motive does not seem to be sincere. It appears that you believe that you can prove something by attacking people's credibility. I understand that it is a method to derive at truth, but I do not believe that it is an intelligent method.

[snip - content removed for forum rule violation]

[thebestofenergy]

@plant You're probably the most dishonest person I've seen in a long time.

Carnists at least make an attempt to address your arguments, and so do conspiracy theorists. But you, somehow, are incapable of doing that.

It's clear now that you've come to the forum to simply prove your point and ignore everyone whenever it is convenient for you.

When you ask what questions you haven't answered, you should ask what questions you HAVE answered. And it's not just questions, it's more paragraphs than I can remember that you just feigned like they didn't exist, even though they were showing how what you were saying was idiotic - and then you simply kept repeating your original debunked points, over and over.

The fact that you keep dodging questions dishonestly, you keep faking like nothing happened, you keep contradicting yourself, and you keep going against forum rules even though you were warned multiple times, makes you really obnoxious.

The only thing you keep doing is repeating yourself. Are you done, and ready to address everything that shows how all your reasoning is flawed, or will you keep behaving like an obnoxious manchild?

Do I really have to copy paste ALL the stuff I said to you, because you're unable to read it apparently?
Or will you finally put in the effort, and stop being dishonest?

[brimstoneSalad]

You have deleted my valid reply to @Your_Construct and left only the part about your false accusation. That is not fair.

Information is being suppressed.

Information is not being suppressed, there didn't seem to be new information there, just more spammy content.

Here's the link from his post if anybody is curious: https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... nemys-ene/
I'm sure he misrepresented the content.

Bad behavior is being punished. The content still exists and could be restored if it were decided that you are making an effort to follow the forum rules.

Even in the case that the information that I shared is invalid, there should be no reason to delete it like that.

It was spammy and redundant, but it was principally removed because you are in outstanding violation of forum rules because of your behavior in refusing to answer others' questions to engage in Socratic debate. Consider it a mild spanking. You will not be permitted to continue lecturing until you answer those questions.

A supposed ignored question that you are unable to reference is certainly not going to justify your behavior.

Plant, I'd be happy for you to continue this discussion AND other discussions to come. You are welcome here. But you must follow the forum rules.

I asked for a reference to the questions that I supposedly had ignored. I even added "once more, please".

Others have told you some, and I told you how to find them. They exist in this thread. I'm not going to go copy and paste all of the questions in this thread for you, that's your homework. Maybe another user will do it for you, but if not that's still your job before you continue to post on this topic.

Your motive does not seem to be sincere.

Attacking the motive of forum moderation when you are asked multiple times to follow the rules is a very effective way to wear out your welcome.
You were banned elsewhere and likely when you are inevitably banned here for continuing to violate forum rules you will make the same accusations about vegans not wanting to listen to all of the "evidence" of plant intelligence -- however, anybody who reads this thread will be able to see that you are lying.

Answer the questions asked of you and you may continue. Fail to answer them and continue anyway, and you'll be banned. Simple as that. You have to do your part and humor the other posters with answers to their questions even if you don't yet understand their relevance.