Date: 9/09/2026 15:28:23
From: Bubblecar
ID: 2428025
Subject: ‘This is dangerous’: slime moulds and the bitter debate over the nature of intelligence

Long but interesting and slightly scary article, recommended by my older sister. I haven’t read it yet, I will this evening.

Scientists are battling over whether supposedly simple organisms should be considered ‘intelligent’. The outcome could reshape our understanding of the natural world – and our own place within it

Forty years ago, as an undergraduate in Hokkaido, Toshiyuki Nakagaki came upon a lemon-yellow stain in a petri dish. That encounter turned him into a doyen of slime mould research – and fed a storm of biological and philosophical debate about the meanings of life and intelligence that persists to this day. Before, no one would have called a slime mould “intelligent”; the popular adjective, in fact, was “simple”. “A simple mass of protoplasm,” one 1895 description ran; “among the most simple of organisms”, said another. And it was hard to argue otherwise. A slime mould can appear to be just a small cell, capable only of feeding and reproducing. Simple is as simple does.

….In 2000, his astonishing research began to surface in the media. “Slime mould solves maze puzzle,” one headline ran, summarising an experiment in which Nakagaki induced a Physarum to find the shortest route through a maze in search of food.

Full article

Reply Quote

Date: 11/09/2026 00:33:30
From: transition
ID: 2428443
Subject: re: ‘This is dangerous’: slime moulds and the bitter debate over the nature of intelligence

the basis of computation exists in organic replicators, it might be argued that is what they are, organic replicators are doing computation.

Reply Quote

Date: 11/09/2026 08:35:40
From: SCIENCE
ID: 2428472
Subject: re: ‘This is dangerous’: slime moulds and the bitter debate over the nature of intelligence

nobody has ever dismissed intelligence on the way to abusive exploitation of productive agents before, never

Reply Quote