Few days ago I watched Mythbusters episode on myths around organisms. Of some episodes that I've watched, this one is the most stunning, and thrilling. The team were faced by a theory that living organisms are somewhat interconnected (if I'm not mistaken).Humans are interconnected as we’re reacting toward each other, and so do animals. what about other living organisms? to answer this they use a polygraph similar to a lie detector to proof it with an analogy that if somehow living organisms do have reaction towards a stimulation faced/provided by other organism (in this case: harm), the polygraph would react. Firstly they experimented on a plant and then leukocyte (white blood cell), and lastly on bacteria in a yoghurt.
Although from the last two objects they experimented on, they didnt find satisfiying answer (on they’re understanding of what may explains interconnected organisms; owner’s leucocyte didnt react when the owner’s is electricuted, and bacteria-ful yoghurt also didnt react when it’s poured with hot water), –and overall they call it busted– the result of the first experiment is the one that captured most of my attention.
who knows something that’s been quiet most of the time -well, all time- can actually react instantly on a stimulation, quietly. Believe it or not, plants invisibly react when they’re harmed and shockingly..they do know when human is about to harm them. the polygraph pen pulsed when Tory (the scientist-co hosting the show) from afar concentrated his mind to hurt the contained plant without even physically touching it.
Although overall they called it BUSTED, Should this particular inspiring-phenomenon answer other questions?
Should this lead to a new understanding of plants? of organisms? of something beyond physical organisms? of dead organs?
At this point, I suspect that something could explain it all—i’m thinking of the right word to explain ‘nyawa’ in english, it’s not a ‘chance for living’ as what LIFE (the usual translation for nyawa) implies, but it is more of a sole object, that is in an object by itself that are contained by the organisms (set of organs) that makes them alive, in arabic it’s called ‘RUH’. I somehow feel that only organisms with ‘Nyawa’ is eligible for this experiment, thus parts of organisms, or simply ‘moving’ organisms should be considered as somethingelse. something that is not ‘bernyawa’.
Should there be another criteria of classification other than what science has described till today. or even more fundamentally questioning wether it should be classification or stratification of creature–what a creature have that others don’t,thus the more they have the higher their level is, the least their potential, the lower their position is. What other thing that science has been failing to see, to proof.
——————————————–anyway————————————–
Knowing that plants do get hurt, you probably need to reconsider some reasons when you stomp on grass, when you cut twigs off branches, when you pulled away petals of roses, when you throw away a bouquet of flowers, when you chainsawed a tree, when you burn off a forest. When we have the least conscience that it might hurt. when in some cases it’s merely casual, unintentional.
Also, probably by now people who call themselves vegetarian due to animal’s right violation should find other reason to eat plant-related-produce, because plants react on harm as animals do. what differentiates the two is, that most plants do not show their reaction when it’s harmed, or should we say, all these while we never knew how to comprehend their reaction as how we hear, or see, or feel animal’s reaction when they’re hurt.
Thus the problem was not on killing organisms for food, it’s about the intention when you’re taking their lives. in this case, animal’s right is right to certain extent, that killing them to fulfill you’re instinct of killing is wrong, but slaughtering them for surviving is right. Slaughtering by intentionally hurting is wrong, slaughtering with a consideration for immediate dying is right. Thus how far should we call Animal’s RIGHT as right, as we are us, not them. and we previously failed to describe our fellow plants’ rights and led ourselves across the line–if there should’ve been plant’s rights. How right is human’s RIGHT if apparently the right thing to do is about the intention. not what the RIGHTS have authorized.
Enquire more of what other thing that are considered as LIVING THINGS and to what extent today’s science have classified that something is truly not living. Well plants are considered organism due to the ‘growing’ feature, but never solely to its ability of immediate reaction. what about those that loose from our sight, due to its vastness, speed and incomparability to human. Something’s that is too big or too small, too fast or too slow, too complicated or simply too simple. What about earth?
Feb.29.2008 / 11pm
No comments:
Post a Comment