[klmr]

> Yet this is the same type of work people are using to argue that that crabs/fish can feel/experience pain.

Not really: a fundamental requirement in the assessment of pain reception in animals is the presence and stimulation of nociceptors (pain receptors). Plants don’t have any nerves, so they fundamentally lack pain reception. It’s entirely possible that they have developed an alternative system to experience pain (e.g. via analogous action potential signalling) but at this point our conventional model of pain reception completely breaks down.

[nezzle]

We could connect a nociceptor to a computer. Does the computer now experience pain?

Just because the mechanism exists for sedation or pain does not imply the experience of consciousness or pain.

[klmr]

I’m not arguing that. I’m arguing that a nociceptor is necessary but not sufficient to argue for pain experience. And plants don’t even fulfil this basic, necessary criterion. So the “type of work” shown in the article isn’t the same kind of evidence conventionally used to argue for pain experience.