It’s more the processing that’s relevant for pain. No processing, no pain.
For instance, some humans have very specific genetic mutations that do not allow them to feel pain. The peripheral nerves still send the pain signals to the brain but it cannot process them. Therefore, no pain.
There could be a discussion on whether very simple nervous systems (like in jellyfish) without a central component (brain) can process pain. But I’m not a biological researcher or philosopher so that’s outside my Lemmy paygrade.
And what makes them different from any other chemical reaction is a little disingenuous. Might as well ask what’s the difference between burning a human on a stake and melting glass? Both are just chemical reactions involving heat from a certain perspective.
There is simply no organ comparable to the brain in plants that would allow for plant pain. That’s pretty much it.
You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts…?
A book is more than the sum of its words.
A painting is more than the sum of its pigments
Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.
This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.
If you’re interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You’re not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.
Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that’s conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature
Well you have to understand that elements, much like molecules aren’t really made of things, they’re made of the math, physics, and chemistry acting on the things that’re there
And what is a nervous system really? Why is it so special and different from any other chemical reaction?
It’s more the processing that’s relevant for pain. No processing, no pain.
For instance, some humans have very specific genetic mutations that do not allow them to feel pain. The peripheral nerves still send the pain signals to the brain but it cannot process them. Therefore, no pain.
There could be a discussion on whether very simple nervous systems (like in jellyfish) without a central component (brain) can process pain. But I’m not a biological researcher or philosopher so that’s outside my Lemmy paygrade.
And what makes them different from any other chemical reaction is a little disingenuous. Might as well ask what’s the difference between burning a human on a stake and melting glass? Both are just chemical reactions involving heat from a certain perspective.
There is simply no organ comparable to the brain in plants that would allow for plant pain. That’s pretty much it.
Aren’t we just like Quarks on the most basic level? So why would one arrangement of Quarks, produce feeling people and not another?
Maybe objects feel pain, but can’t remember it, or react to it.
You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts…?
A book is more than the sum of its words.
A painting is more than the sum of its pigments
Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.
This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.
If you’re interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You’re not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.
Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that’s conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature
Ikr? Makes no sense. It’s like if 12 + 4 equals 25^3
Well you have to understand that elements, much like molecules aren’t really made of things, they’re made of the math, physics, and chemistry acting on the things that’re there
Really living up to your username today