Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence

Proponents of the concepts of plant intelligence and plant neurobiology often use historical sources as "evidence" and argue that eminent past scientists have supported ideas of plant intelligence, memory, learning, decision-making, agency, and consciousness. Historical sources include wri...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Protoplasma 2024-09
Hauptverfasser: Kingsland, Sharon E, Taiz, Lincoln
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Protoplasma
container_volume
creator Kingsland, Sharon E
Taiz, Lincoln
description Proponents of the concepts of plant intelligence and plant neurobiology often use historical sources as "evidence" and argue that eminent past scientists have supported ideas of plant intelligence, memory, learning, decision-making, agency, and consciousness. Historical sources include writings by Charles Darwin, Julius von Sachs, F. W. Went, K. V. Thimann, Barbara McClintock, and J. B. Lamarck. Advocates of plant neurobiology also argue that the ideas of J. C. Bose, an Indian scientist who is considered an important forerunner of plant neurobiology, were suppressed chiefly because of racism. Plant neurobiology has been criticized on scientific grounds, but there has not been close scrutiny of the use of historical sources as a form of evidence. We provide the first in-depth analysis of how historical sources have been used and misused, and conclude that there is a consistent pattern of distortion of these sources. Distortions include the use of erroneous quotations, alteration of quotations, selective quotations without context, and misinterpretation and exaggeration of historical statements. In the case of Bose, we show that there were legitimate scientific reasons for questioning his interpretations of botanical experiments and argue that this context cannot be ignored in evaluating contemporary responses to Bose. Overall, the common practice by proponents of plant intelligence and plant consciousness of uncritically citing the words of eminent scientists of the past, taken out of their historical context to bolster their arguments, should not be confused with scientific evidence supporting these concepts, even when the quotations, themselves, are accurate.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00709-024-01988-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3104819752</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3104819752</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6f4a1f8c5a44ed81db10f19756e25396e80f3bda39ca18691d4ae40849b367093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kM1OwzAQhC0EoqXwAhyQ1RMXw67tuPYRofIjVYIDSNws19nQoDQpcYLE25PSwmXnMjOa_Rg7R7hCgNl1Gg44AVILQGetwAM2RoOZMAjykI0BlBJo1duInaT0AQCZhOyYjZSTMyOlHbP5cxXqjk_LuqOqKt-pjjTloc55tyK-LlOfiDcFX5Wpa9oyhoqnpm8jJR4Sp68y3yZO2VERqkRne52w17v5y-2DWDzdP97eLEREqzthCh2wsDELWlNuMV8iFOhmmSGZKWfIQqGWeVAuBrTGYa4DabDaLZUZXlUTdrnr3bTNZ0-p88PCOAwPNTV98gpB222hHKxyZ41tk1JLhd-05Tq03x7Bb_H5HT4_4PO_-DwOoYt9f79cU_4f-eOlfgDZr2nb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3104819752</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Kingsland, Sharon E ; Taiz, Lincoln</creator><creatorcontrib>Kingsland, Sharon E ; Taiz, Lincoln</creatorcontrib><description>Proponents of the concepts of plant intelligence and plant neurobiology often use historical sources as "evidence" and argue that eminent past scientists have supported ideas of plant intelligence, memory, learning, decision-making, agency, and consciousness. Historical sources include writings by Charles Darwin, Julius von Sachs, F. W. Went, K. V. Thimann, Barbara McClintock, and J. B. Lamarck. Advocates of plant neurobiology also argue that the ideas of J. C. Bose, an Indian scientist who is considered an important forerunner of plant neurobiology, were suppressed chiefly because of racism. Plant neurobiology has been criticized on scientific grounds, but there has not been close scrutiny of the use of historical sources as a form of evidence. We provide the first in-depth analysis of how historical sources have been used and misused, and conclude that there is a consistent pattern of distortion of these sources. Distortions include the use of erroneous quotations, alteration of quotations, selective quotations without context, and misinterpretation and exaggeration of historical statements. In the case of Bose, we show that there were legitimate scientific reasons for questioning his interpretations of botanical experiments and argue that this context cannot be ignored in evaluating contemporary responses to Bose. Overall, the common practice by proponents of plant intelligence and plant consciousness of uncritically citing the words of eminent scientists of the past, taken out of their historical context to bolster their arguments, should not be confused with scientific evidence supporting these concepts, even when the quotations, themselves, are accurate.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-183X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1615-6102</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1615-6102</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00709-024-01988-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39276228</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Austria</publisher><ispartof>Protoplasma, 2024-09</ispartof><rights>2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6f4a1f8c5a44ed81db10f19756e25396e80f3bda39ca18691d4ae40849b367093</cites><orcidid>0009-0000-3114-1373</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39276228$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kingsland, Sharon E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taiz, Lincoln</creatorcontrib><title>Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence</title><title>Protoplasma</title><addtitle>Protoplasma</addtitle><description>Proponents of the concepts of plant intelligence and plant neurobiology often use historical sources as "evidence" and argue that eminent past scientists have supported ideas of plant intelligence, memory, learning, decision-making, agency, and consciousness. Historical sources include writings by Charles Darwin, Julius von Sachs, F. W. Went, K. V. Thimann, Barbara McClintock, and J. B. Lamarck. Advocates of plant neurobiology also argue that the ideas of J. C. Bose, an Indian scientist who is considered an important forerunner of plant neurobiology, were suppressed chiefly because of racism. Plant neurobiology has been criticized on scientific grounds, but there has not been close scrutiny of the use of historical sources as a form of evidence. We provide the first in-depth analysis of how historical sources have been used and misused, and conclude that there is a consistent pattern of distortion of these sources. Distortions include the use of erroneous quotations, alteration of quotations, selective quotations without context, and misinterpretation and exaggeration of historical statements. In the case of Bose, we show that there were legitimate scientific reasons for questioning his interpretations of botanical experiments and argue that this context cannot be ignored in evaluating contemporary responses to Bose. Overall, the common practice by proponents of plant intelligence and plant consciousness of uncritically citing the words of eminent scientists of the past, taken out of their historical context to bolster their arguments, should not be confused with scientific evidence supporting these concepts, even when the quotations, themselves, are accurate.</description><issn>0033-183X</issn><issn>1615-6102</issn><issn>1615-6102</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kM1OwzAQhC0EoqXwAhyQ1RMXw67tuPYRofIjVYIDSNws19nQoDQpcYLE25PSwmXnMjOa_Rg7R7hCgNl1Gg44AVILQGetwAM2RoOZMAjykI0BlBJo1duInaT0AQCZhOyYjZSTMyOlHbP5cxXqjk_LuqOqKt-pjjTloc55tyK-LlOfiDcFX5Wpa9oyhoqnpm8jJR4Sp68y3yZO2VERqkRne52w17v5y-2DWDzdP97eLEREqzthCh2wsDELWlNuMV8iFOhmmSGZKWfIQqGWeVAuBrTGYa4DabDaLZUZXlUTdrnr3bTNZ0-p88PCOAwPNTV98gpB222hHKxyZ41tk1JLhd-05Tq03x7Bb_H5HT4_4PO_-DwOoYt9f79cU_4f-eOlfgDZr2nb</recordid><startdate>20240914</startdate><enddate>20240914</enddate><creator>Kingsland, Sharon E</creator><creator>Taiz, Lincoln</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3114-1373</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240914</creationdate><title>Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence</title><author>Kingsland, Sharon E ; Taiz, Lincoln</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6f4a1f8c5a44ed81db10f19756e25396e80f3bda39ca18691d4ae40849b367093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kingsland, Sharon E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taiz, Lincoln</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Protoplasma</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kingsland, Sharon E</au><au>Taiz, Lincoln</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence</atitle><jtitle>Protoplasma</jtitle><addtitle>Protoplasma</addtitle><date>2024-09-14</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>0033-183X</issn><issn>1615-6102</issn><eissn>1615-6102</eissn><abstract>Proponents of the concepts of plant intelligence and plant neurobiology often use historical sources as "evidence" and argue that eminent past scientists have supported ideas of plant intelligence, memory, learning, decision-making, agency, and consciousness. Historical sources include writings by Charles Darwin, Julius von Sachs, F. W. Went, K. V. Thimann, Barbara McClintock, and J. B. Lamarck. Advocates of plant neurobiology also argue that the ideas of J. C. Bose, an Indian scientist who is considered an important forerunner of plant neurobiology, were suppressed chiefly because of racism. Plant neurobiology has been criticized on scientific grounds, but there has not been close scrutiny of the use of historical sources as a form of evidence. We provide the first in-depth analysis of how historical sources have been used and misused, and conclude that there is a consistent pattern of distortion of these sources. Distortions include the use of erroneous quotations, alteration of quotations, selective quotations without context, and misinterpretation and exaggeration of historical statements. In the case of Bose, we show that there were legitimate scientific reasons for questioning his interpretations of botanical experiments and argue that this context cannot be ignored in evaluating contemporary responses to Bose. Overall, the common practice by proponents of plant intelligence and plant consciousness of uncritically citing the words of eminent scientists of the past, taken out of their historical context to bolster their arguments, should not be confused with scientific evidence supporting these concepts, even when the quotations, themselves, are accurate.</abstract><cop>Austria</cop><pmid>39276228</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00709-024-01988-1</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3114-1373</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0033-183X
ispartof Protoplasma, 2024-09
issn 0033-183X
1615-6102
1615-6102
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3104819752
source Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
title Plant "intelligence" and the misuse of historical sources as evidence
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T15%3A24%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Plant%20%22intelligence%22%20and%20the%20misuse%20of%20historical%20sources%20as%20evidence&rft.jtitle=Protoplasma&rft.au=Kingsland,%20Sharon%20E&rft.date=2024-09-14&rft.issn=0033-183X&rft.eissn=1615-6102&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00709-024-01988-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3104819752%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3104819752&rft_id=info:pmid/39276228&rfr_iscdi=true