Abstract
Intelligence is a fundamental property for all life enabling an increased probability of survival and reproduction under wild circumstances. Kingsland and Taiz (2024) think that plants are not intelligent but seem unaware of the extensive literature about intelligence, memory, learning and chromatin topology in plants. Their views are consequently rejected. Their claim of fake quotations is shown to result from faulty reasoning and lack of understanding of practical biology. Their use of social media as scholarly evidence is unacceptable. Darwin's views on intelligence are described, and their pertinence to the adaptive responses of plants is discussed. Justifications for comments I have made concerning McClintock and her "thoughtful" cell, von Sachs writings as indicating purpose (teleonomy) to plant behaviour, Went and Thimann's allusions to plant intelligence and Bose legacy as the father of plant electrophysiologyare described. These scientists were usually first in their field of knowledge, and their understanding was consequently deeper. The article finishes with a brief critical analysis of the 36 scientists who were used to condemn plant neurobiology as of no use. It is concluded that participants signed up to a false prospectus because contrary evidence was omitted.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
