Comment on Isn’t the use of strict behaviorism to explain animals kind of obnoxious?
MolochAlter@lemmy.world 6 months agoFeelings in the sense of “they feel things through a sensory organ and react to that”, same as sight, hearing, touch? Sure!
Feelings like fear? No.
Aversion from pain is not the same as fear, fear is aversion from pain that hasn’t happened yet, it requires the ability to abstract the concept of negative outcomes and expand the aversion from discomfort to possible discomfort.
No plant has been observed reacting to something that it hasn’t experienced at least once before.
Decoy321@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Your bias is showing. The fact that we have not observed something is not evidence that it doesn’t exist.
MolochAlter@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Ok, have you accepted the lord Jesus Christ as your lord and saviour?
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 months ago
Black holes were thought to be only theoretical until we fucking found one.
MolochAlter@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Theoretical is not the same as “made the fuck up”
Something being theoretical is as good as it gets short of being observed in science, it means the most evidence points to it being real which is why we spent insane amounts of money to find evidence of it.
If you were to postulate black holes without evidence they would exist but they would still made the fuck up until proven otherwise, not “theoretical”.
Again, have you accepted the lord Jesus Christ?
Decoy321@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I give him the same level of acceptance as Allah, Vishnu, Odin, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There’s a nonzero possibility that they’re real, after all. I try to keep an open mind.
MolochAlter@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Sure, I give a sentient mollusk the same credence, i.e. a token amount that does not change my behaviour at all.