Dogs, mirrors, self awareness...

Look folks, feel free to continue this asinine thread without me if you
want, but at least stop crossposting to rec.aquaria.freshwater.goldfish.
This discussion appears to have started
in alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian (a group that always has halfwits and
loonies flaming each other) and has long ago drifted from goldfish to
dogs, which is definitely OFF-TOPIC here.

I'd just like to say a couple of more things: Rudy, you're a smart guy
and usually know what you're talking about. But you need to improve your
manners otherwise people won't take you seriously, and David will just
claim the moral high ground and gain sympathy by acting innocent. David,
you need to stop looking for fights and to get a formal education - your
lack of comprehension of the most basic scientific procedures and
established philosophical principles makes you unqualified to adequately
handle any debate about consciousness, self-awareness, or experiments
measuring animal intelligence in general.

- Logic316



"I think animal testing is a terrible idea; they get all nervous and
give the wrong answers."

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:34:42 -0400, Logic316 wrote:

David,
you need to stop looking for fights and to get a formal education - your
lack of comprehension of the most basic scientific procedures and
established philosophical principles makes you unqualified to adequately
handle any debate about consciousness, self-awareness, or experiments
measuring animal intelligence in general.

- Logic316

The mirror test shows an individual's ability to understand reflection.
If an animal never understands that a mirror can show a reflection of
itself, that doesn't mean that it has no concept of itself. It simply means
that is doesn't have a mental concept of a reflection of itself...it always
believes the reflection is of a different being. I would certainly agree it
shows they don't have self recognition, but that doesn't mean they have
no concept of themselves. There are things to indicate that they do,
but as yet I've seen nothing to indicate that they don't.

David ****wit Harrison lied:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:34:42 -0400, Logic316 wrote:


David,
you need to stop looking for fights and to get a formal education - your
lack of comprehension of the most basic scientific procedures and
established philosophical principles makes you unqualified to adequately
handle any debate about consciousness, self-awareness, or experiments
measuring animal intelligence in general.

- Logic316


The mirror test shows an individual's ability to understand reflection.

No. The mirror test shows an animal's self-awareness.

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:17:55 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:

David ****wit Harrison lied:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:34:42 -0400, Logic316 wrote:


David,
you need to stop looking for fights and to get a formal education - your
lack of comprehension of the most basic scientific procedures and
established philosophical principles makes you unqualified to adequately
handle any debate about consciousness, self-awareness, or experiments
measuring animal intelligence in general.

- Logic316


The mirror test shows an individual's ability to understand reflection.

No. The mirror test shows an animal's self-awareness.

It really can't show that at all. A person will always have to wonder
if they're willing to think about it, if the animal simply has no concept
of its image being reflected, or maybe it has a concept of its own image
that is so different from reality that it would never consider the mirror
image to be itself. Both of those are much more likely than that it has
no concept of itself at all. It must have some concepts of itself, even
if those concepts only involve its own flavor, scent, etc. It could also
have other concepts, such as of itself running, or of itself eating, or
playing, etc. Such things are admittedly beyond your ability to consider,
but they are quite likely non the less.

dh@. wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:34:42 -0400, Logic316 wrote:

David,
you need to stop looking for fights and to get a formal education - your
lack of comprehension of the most basic scientific procedures and
established philosophical principles makes you unqualified to adequately
handle any debate about consciousness, self-awareness, or experiments
measuring animal intelligence in general.

- Logic316

The mirror test shows an individual's ability to understand reflection.
If an animal never understands that a mirror can show a reflection of
itself, that doesn't mean that it has no concept of itself. It simply means
that is doesn't have a mental concept of a reflection of itself...it always
believes the reflection is of a different being. I would certainly agree it
shows they don't have self recognition, but that doesn't mean they have
no concept of themselves. There are things to indicate that they do,
but as yet I've seen nothing to indicate that they don't.

I'll add to this "debate".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror-...self-awareness
"There is some debate in the scientific community as to the value and
interpretation of results of the mirror test. While this test has been
extensively conducted on primates, there is also debate as to the value
of the test as applied to animals who rely primarily on senses other
than vision, such as dogs."


I tried a different, non-scientific test with my cat. I used a ball of
hair from my cat, and a ball of hair from a foreign cat. When she
smelled the hair from the foreign cat, she reacted aggresively, but
when she smelled the ball of her hair, she had no reaction, but simply
didn't care about presence of the hair. So it very much seems as though
she is aware of her own scent, which is important for a territorial
animal like a cat. This test can be intepreted in the same way as the
mirror test, where with the mirror test, an animal recognizes it's own
appearance, and with my "hair test" an animal recognizes it's own
scent.

Although I can never really know what my cat is thinking, she appears
to be aware of how a mirror works. She often looks at me through my
refection on the mirror but has her ears turned towards me to listen to
me. When she is faced with her own reflection, she doesn't appear to
care about it. I can assume two reasons for that: 1. It doesn't smell
like an animal, so it isn't important, 2. Whatever she sees doesn't
give her food, whereas I do, so my reflection is of more interest to
her. Maybe I can add a third one: She doesn't care about her appearance.