“Bose’s experiments impressed luminaries including Albert Einstein and Lord Kelvin, but the conclusions he drew put him at odds with many leading botanists, who saw a dangerous blending of science with spirituality—and insufficient evidence to support his claims that plants were capable of intelligent behavior, learning, and memory.”
Kind of incredible how nothing has really changed since then. Discussions of plant consciousness are nearly always dominated by very loud self-proclaimed skeptics - more of a social identity than an intellectual one at this point. They are strict materialists to a fault - any theory that appears to threaten materialism is dismissed. Even if it doesn’t actually threaten “materialism” but rather expands the set of objects considered “material” or in this case “thinking” (which is too dangerous for them to consider because “thinking” quickly bleeds into “conscious”). It’s telling that Einstein and Kelvin were impressed by his work, but these days any self proclaimed skeptic can just dismiss these ideas out of hand.
This is demonstrated clearly later on:
“Among these contemporaries, there was little room for what Bose himself described as “the inherent bent of the Indian mind towards mysticism and unchecked imagination.””
This is not only racist but also demonstrates the exact skeptic bent I just described. By lumping in a new science grounded in physiology with “mysticism” they are poisoning the well very insidiously.
I guess science has probably always been like this. Peoples entire careers become dependent on the flimsy theories of today so anything unorthodox is automatically threatening to them. For what it’s worth I’m not saying skepticism isn’t warranted especially for new claims but it seems to me that Bose was treated very unfairly, and I suspect that his theories would’ve held up well if his field had expanded over the last hundred years. I also think we’ll see some studies soon that absolutely blow the lid off this stuff and Bose will be remembered as a Galileo type figure of his field.
“Bose’s experiments impressed luminaries including Albert Einstein and Lord Kelvin, but the conclusions he drew put him at odds with many leading botanists, who saw a dangerous blending of science with spirituality—and insufficient evidence to support his claims that plants were capable of intelligent behavior, learning, and memory.”
Kind of incredible how nothing has really changed since then. Discussions of plant consciousness are nearly always dominated by very loud self-proclaimed skeptics - more of a social identity than an intellectual one at this point. They are strict materialists to a fault - any theory that appears to threaten materialism is dismissed. Even if it doesn’t actually threaten “materialism” but rather expands the set of objects considered “material” or in this case “thinking” (which is too dangerous for them to consider because “thinking” quickly bleeds into “conscious”). It’s telling that Einstein and Kelvin were impressed by his work, but these days any self proclaimed skeptic can just dismiss these ideas out of hand.
This is demonstrated clearly later on:
“Among these contemporaries, there was little room for what Bose himself described as “the inherent bent of the Indian mind towards mysticism and unchecked imagination.””
This is not only racist but also demonstrates the exact skeptic bent I just described. By lumping in a new science grounded in physiology with “mysticism” they are poisoning the well very insidiously.
I guess science has probably always been like this. Peoples entire careers become dependent on the flimsy theories of today so anything unorthodox is automatically threatening to them. For what it’s worth I’m not saying skepticism isn’t warranted especially for new claims but it seems to me that Bose was treated very unfairly, and I suspect that his theories would’ve held up well if his field had expanded over the last hundred years. I also think we’ll see some studies soon that absolutely blow the lid off this stuff and Bose will be remembered as a Galileo type figure of his field.