Is it possible to attribute agency, goal-oriented behaviors, motor intentions, or “chemical actions” to plants? After an indispensable terminological and conceptual clarification – considering the presence of terms often used interchangeably, however connected – I report several criticisms and challenges associated with extending the concept of agency to the plant world. Following this, I discuss some premises required to address this topic, focusing on the unique structure and organization of plant bodies. I then explore two examples of plant behavior: the first concerns ongoing research on the movements of climbing plants, and the second involves different levels of plant communication. Both examples provide evidence to consider the potential for plants to exhibit goal-directed, modular, and contextually adaptable behaviors. Further research into these capabilities could improve our understanding of non-muscular, less integrated, and more process-oriented forms of “action”, thereby clarifying the influence of various processes and capacities involved. Overall, studying plant characteristics and activities not only advances the discourse from a novel perspective but also facilitates updated conceptual distinctions, hypothesize new paths of research, and a deeper understanding of the systemic and relational aspects of plant interactions.
Margherita Bianchi (Thu,) studied this question.