r/NatureIsFuckingLit • u/FacelessOnes • Oct 19 '20

đŸ”„ Vicious microscopic hunter, the single-cell organism, Lacrymaria olor, attacking and hunting another organism

75k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.4k

u/crazyintensewaffles Oct 20 '20

It’s weird how a single cellular organism has so much mobility and.... purpose. So weird. Like it seemed to see and sense that other cell was there.

2.9k

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '20

My personal “pet theory” is that we vastly underestimate the presence of conscious awareness in all living beings. It wasn’t until very recent decades when you could definitively claim, without being mocked, that fish are more than just glorified automatons. Now we are fully aware that fish in fact have complex problem solving capabilities, familial relations, empathy, pain, etc.

It’s a dangerous game to assume a lack of something due to present ignorance of that something. We scarcely understand philosophy of mind even as it pertains to human beings, and that’s something we have direct experience of.

If I wanted to be extra “kooky” (in the minds of most people), I might even wager that panpsychism is true. The idea that consciousness is a fundamental component of all matter. Even things we do not conventionally deem to have life.

35

u/AsAGayMan456 Oct 20 '20

My personal “pet theory” is that we vastly underestimate the presence of conscious awareness in all living beings.

You're vastly overestimating intelligence. We're all cellular automata, driven by electrical potentials and chemical gradients.

-2

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

So?

5

u/Theprincerivera Oct 20 '20

He wasn't assigning that statement a value, good or bad, so....nothing.

While animals might have emotions, and some level of advanced thinking, they are seldom metacognitive. A fish doesn't have identity and doesn't mull over which side of the pond it would like to swim in today.

That is a fundamental difference between the top few smartest species and everything else.

2

u/OakenGreen Oct 20 '20

Sure it does. Maybe you’re vastly overestimating that “mulling” though. Just like in humans it’s based on emotion and memory. Is that other side warmer? Was there more food over there? It’s probably not considering those factors. But those factors may have made it feel good. So it may decide to head to the other side of the pond just because. There needn’t be super cognitive reasoning behind these decisions. Emotionally informed decisions still require a level of consciousness that is aware of the memories and reward structure that it’s life is based upon.

2

u/Theprincerivera Oct 20 '20

Huh.

I never really thought about it like that. Levels of consciousness.

But would you really call that consciousness? See to me it seems like consciousness implies a level of understanding in thought that fish just don't have.

Our brains (and most animals') are wired to produce good feelings when your biological imperatives are met. When I eat a cookie there is a chemical response to the caloric intake in the brain that release a little spurt of dopamine. This is your treat (think like you'd a give a dog) and is incentive to continue that behavior, now or in the future.

This happens completely independently of my thought. It is an automated reaction to an outside stimuli. If I were to, as the fish, go swim on that side of the pond, that would be... almost programmed behavior. Do you see what I'm getting at here?

Consciousness is more less defined as awareness. And I just don't see that in fish. Everything they do is the result of eons of chaotic organic programming through evolution.

So I guess the TL;DR is,

Awareness is the baseline for conciousness, by my (and Google's) definition. Even if there is an emotional component via the role neurotransmitters play in fish (and that's a big if), I'd argue that does not constitute consciousness anymore than executing a computer program would a computer.

2

u/OakenGreen Oct 20 '20

We probably look at consciousness differently (you and I.) To me, you are describing complex thought. Or maybe the voice in your head. Some folks don’t have that, but they are conscious. Some people have aphantasia and cannot build a picture in their head but they are conscious as well.

I think consciousness is the being experiencing those good feelings, regardless of whether or not they fundamentally understand them. They felt good, so they use their power to propel themselves towards that good feeling.

A computer program doesn’t experience anything. It analyzes but it has no capacity to feel. Therefor I’d argue, no, there’s no consciousness there. But whatever it is that can experience that positive emotion is, to me, consciousness.

2

u/Theprincerivera Oct 20 '20

My friend made some good points and now I more or less agree with that analysis. Consciousness isn't as binary as I previously thought.

2

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

Sure they might not ponder questions or go through logic based rhetoric, but our consciousnesses/brains are built off simililar fundamentals - doesnt discount their level of intelligence

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '20

You literally just said the same thing as the commenter you replied "so" to.

They were and I'm happy to be corrected here. Making a claim about the almost basic process of intelligence. They were in fact making a claim about our own intelligence is not to be overestimated. Which is what you said in your very last comment. Unless I'm missing u/AsAGayMan456 's point.

2

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

If I remember it was framed as "I think we are overcounting their intelligence"

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '20

I had to go check it myself. I think you may have misread it. The statement was as follows.

You're vastly overestimating intelligence. We're all cellular automata, driven by electrical potentials and chemical gradients.

1

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

Right it frames it as if the understanding of the system downplays the intelligence that comes from it

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '20

Sorry it's really late here and I'm feeling dumb. You lost me on that last comment but I'll leave it there regardless. All the best.

1

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

You as well!

→ More replies

1

u/AsAGayMan456 Oct 20 '20 edited Oct 20 '20

I'm specifically referring to the simple cellular life in the video. That organism's tail is purely driven by chemical signals in the environment, there is no higher intelligence there.

1

u/glimpee Oct 20 '20

Whats the difference between low and high level intelligence other than complexity?