Apparently “animal” is used here in a non-scientific way, asking whether plants are deserving of ethical concern, not whether scientific taxonomy needs to be rearranged. It seems entirely...
Apparently “animal” is used here in a non-scientific way, asking whether plants are deserving of ethical concern, not whether scientific taxonomy needs to be rearranged.
It seems entirely impractical, given that plants are often very decentralized so that there aren’t clear boundaries between one plant and the next. For example, a forest of Aspens may share a common root system.
What about Fungi? They exist in this strange space between both plant and animal, and form the foundation of plant-internet.
Apparently “animal” is used here in a non-scientific way, asking whether plants are deserving of ethical concern, not whether scientific taxonomy needs to be rearranged.
It seems entirely impractical, given that plants are often very decentralized so that there aren’t clear boundaries between one plant and the next. For example, a forest of Aspens may share a common root system.
Not to mention preventing all forest fires, etc.