Search results

Preface : plant theory? -- The first birth of biopower : from plant to animal life in Foucault -- Thinking plants, with Aristotle and Heidegger -- Animal and plant, life and world in Derrida, or, The plant and the sovereign -- From the world to the territory : vegetable life in Deleuze and Guattari, or, What is a rhizome? -- Coda : what difference does it make?

1. The problem of method and the project of a hermeneutics of the human sciences -- 2. Truth after art -- 3. The destruction of prejudices in nineteenth-century aesthetics and epistemology -- 4. Vigilance and horizon in hermeneutics -- 5. The dialogue that we are.

Plants perform their own interests and purposes. Plants perform in ways that afford and invite specific human experiences. Plants also perform complex biopolitical roles. With these multivalent understandings of plant performance in mind, this introduction to the "Plant Performance" issue of Performance Philosophy outlines the editors' broadly feminist approach to the challenges facing scholars and artists in the field of Critical Plant Studies. We present these challenges, including colonisation and decolonisation, botanical aesthetics and its vegetal limits, instrumentality and vegetal respect, and phytopolitics and plant liveliness, as provocations for scholars and artists grappling with ecological, political and creative human relations with the vegetal world. The introduction, alongside the eight essays included in the issue, considers how thinking with plant performance might create conditions for a more contextual, critical, reflexive, nuanced, and/or urgent understanding of plant-human relationships, both historically and in the current moment. In addition to considering questions of plant performative agency, the issue foregrounds the politico-aesthetic conditions in which plant performances cannot help but occur. It details how specific works of performance art intervene in these conditions, and it contributes to the development of a more global and multiply-situated network of performative, critical plant knowledges, relations, and practices.

AbstractPhilosophers and scientists propose the idea that plants are cognitive, which has been met with criticisms. These criticisms focus on the fact that plants do not possess the properties traditionally associated with cognition. By contrast, several proponents introduce novel ways to conceptualize cognition. How should we make sense of this debate? In this paper, I argue that the plant cognition debate is not about whether plants meet a set of well-delineated and agreed-upon criteria according to which they count as cognitive. Rather, many proponents are hypothesizing about cognition. They construe COGNITION not as an expression of what cognition is, but rather as a conjecture about what cognition might be. These conjectures orient research that can uncover novel similarities amongst the phenomena to which these concepts extend. In defending this view, I argue that investigating plant cognition is valuable, even if the results of these investigations lead us to reject the claim that plants are cognitive.

Plants perform their own interests and purposes. Plants perform in ways that afford and invite specific human experiences. Plants also perform complex biopolitical roles. With these multivalent understandings of plant performance in mind, this introduction to the "Plant Performance" issue of Performance Philosophy outlines the editors' broadly feminist approach to the challenges facing scholars and artists in the field of Critical Plant Studies. We present these challenges, including colonisation and decolonisation, botanical aesthetics and its vegetal limits, instrumentality and vegetal respect, and phytopolitics and plant liveliness, as provocations for scholars and artists grappling with ecological, political and creative human relations with the vegetal world. The introduction, alongside the eight essays included in the issue, considers how thinking with plant performance might create conditions for a more contextual, critical, reflexive, nuanced, and/or urgent understanding of plant-human relationships, both historically and in the current moment. In addition to considering questions of plant performative agency, the issue foregrounds the politico-aesthetic conditions in which plant performances cannot help but occur. It details how specific works of performance art intervene in these conditions, and it contributes to the development of a more global and multiply-situated network of performative, critical plant knowledges, relations, and practices.

The commentaries by Calvo (2018) and Mallatt & Feinberg (2017) on my 2016 target branch out from a common conceptual node like forks in a road. Calvo criticizes me for not acknowledging that plants too are likely to be sentient and claims I have fallen into the kind of category error of which I accuse others ─ a zoocentric bias that fails to grant consciousness to flora. Mallatt & Feinberg maintain that I've gone too far in granting sentience to any species that lacks a nervous system. Calvo makes some good points but there are other issues concerning plant sentience such as metabolic cost and ethical implications. Mallatt & Feinberg take me to task for failing to provide supporting data. They are right, and a partial remedy is offered. They also imply that I have misunderstand basic principles of evolutionary biology. I think they have misunderstood my position.

Recent denial of fish sentience is at variance with the fact that all living organisms need environmental awareness in order to survive in a continuously fluctuating environment. Moreover, fish sentience – like plant sentience – is also strongly supported by the sensitivity of fishes and plants to diverse anesthetics.

AbstractThe mechanism underlying action potentials is routinely used to explicate the mechanistic model of explanation in the philosophy of science. However, characterisations of action potentials often fixate on neurons, mentioning plant cells in passing or ignoring them entirely. The plant sciences are also prone to neglecting non-neuronal action potentials and their role in plant biology. This oversight is significant because plant action potentials bear instructive similarities to those generated by neurons. This paper helps correct the imbalance in representations of action potentials by offering an overview of the mechanism for plant action potentials and highlighting their similarity to those in neurons. Furthermore, it affirms the role of plant action potentials in discovering the evolution and function of mechanisms of action potentials more broadly. We stress the potential of plants for producing generalisations about action potentials and the possible role of plants as experimental organisms.

This paper is the fifth and final contribution to the interdisciplinary scientific project carried out by Marie Rota, aimed at enhancing the role of plants through the writing process. It explores a way of designing the writing of invasive plants in economics from a critical perspective of standard approaches, based on an approach which lies at the crossroads between the philosophy of human development theorised by Amartya Sen and the permacultural ethics initiated by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren. It will constitute an annex to Chapter 5 of the work to be published in Le Bord de l'eau: Marie Rota (Ed.) (2021), Written plants. An interdisciplinary approach. ; Ce papier est la cinquième et dernière contribution au projet scientifique interdisciplinaire porté par Marie Rota, visant à valoriser le rôle des plantes au travers du procédé de l'écriture. Il explore une façon de concevoir l'écriture des plantes invasives en économie depuis une perspective critique des approches standards, à partir d'une approche qui se situe au croisement de la philosophie du développement humain théorisé par Amartya Sen et de l'éthique permaculturelle initiée par Bill Mollison et David Holmgren. Il constituera une annexe du chapitre 5 de l'ouvrage à paraître aux éditions Le Bord de l'eau : Marie Rota (Ed.) (2021), Ecrire les plantes. Une approche interdisciplinaire.

A philosophically satisfactory analysis of the plant relocation problem must resist an immediate move to the practical. Such "pragmatism" takes too much for granted. In order to counter the pragmatic temptation, I insist on raising certain moral questions that are natural to those affected by a plant closing. But to answer these questions, or even determine their legitimacy, moral philosophy is not enough. We must proceed to the theoretical question, what is the function of a capitalist in a capitalist society? This consideration suggests a noncapitalist economic model that would resolve the plant relocation problem. From this model, the viability of which is supported by the remarkable Mondragon experiment, we can deduce a series of general prescriptions for activists and a specific agenda for legislative reform. Only after this ground has been covered can the problem of a specific plant relocation be adequately addressed.

A PHILOSOPHICALLY SATISFACTORY ANALYSIS OF THE PLANT RELOCATION PROBLEM MUST RESIST AN IMMEDIATE MOVE TO THE PRACTICAL. SUCH "PRAGMATISM" TAKES TOO MUCH FOR GRANTED. IN ORDER TO COUNTER THE PRAGMATIC TEMPTATION, I INSIST ON RAISING CERTAIN MORAL QUESTIONS THAT ARE NATURAL TO THOSE AFFECTED BY A PLANT CLOSING. BUT TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS, OR EVEN DETERMINE THEIR LEGITIMACY, MORAL PHILOSOPHY IS NOT ENOUGH. WE MUST PROCEED TO THE THEORETICAL QUESTION, WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF A CAPITALIST IN A CAPITALIST SOCIETY? THIS CONSIDERATION SUGGESTS A NONCAPITALIST ECONOMIC MODEL THAT WOULD RESOLVE THE PLANT RELOCATION PROBLEM. FROM THIS MODEL, THE VIABILITY OF WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE REMARKABLE MONDRAGON EXPERIMENT, WE CAN DEDUCE A SERIES OF GENERAL PRESCRIPTIONS FOR ACTIVISTS AND A SPECIFIC AGENDA FOR LEGISLATIVE REFORM. ONLY AFTER THIS GROUND HAS BEEN COVERED CAN THE PROBLEM OF A SPECIFIC PLANT RELOCATION BE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.