If an animal can pass the mirror test, it’s certainly strong evidence of self-recognition, and indicates the possibility of self-awareness (i.e. a “sense of self”). However, it’s not definitive proof. And if an animal isn’t able to pass, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they do not possess these abilities.
.
For example, animals that rely on other senses more heavily than their vision may not take much interest in the sight of their reflections. Dogs, who recognize others mainly by their sense of smell, might quickly conclude that their mirror image is not of themselves or any other animal, because it lacks a corresponding scent. Furthermore, some animals may be able to recognize themselves in the mirror and see that they have been marked, but do not find the mark important enough to warrant touching or inspection.
Interesting.
Are we to conclude that the test is worthless? If an animal relies on smell (dog) or sound (bats) or some other sense than vision...a mirror wouldn't be too useful would it?
I'm very carefully NOT mentioning hive minds..
I wouldn't call it useless, just failing it doesnt nessisarily mean that the creature doesn't have self-awareness.
Would definitly have to find some other test method to make that arguement, but I believe the premise for passing is sound enough.
OH? The test was designed to determine the existence of self awareness and it fails to do what it was designed to do but it's not useless?
Its not useless because the test does work, it is resonable to assume a creature that can repeatedly pass the test is self-aware. The only issue with the test is that failing it is not a certainty that the creature isn't self aware.
However it still has the use of showing that passing creatures are.
I don't understand. If it is not a certainty that the creature isn't self aware then what was the point of the test?
and why does this follow,
However it still has the use of showing that passing creatures are
How can we be sure that the reason they pass has anything to do with selfawareness if the opposite is not true?
.
Because the reasons they fail has nothing to do with the reasons they pass.
Tests are a good way to check if someone is intelligent.
However some intelligent people arent good test takers.
But if someome repeatedly does well on a test, it is a pretty good sign that they are intelligent.
Meaning tests are not useless, their use should simply be finding out if people are smart, not if they are dumb.
The point of the mirror test is to find out which animals are self-aware, not to find out which animals are not self aware.
find out which animals are self-aware, not to find out which animals are not self aware.
that makes zero sense to me.
Ok, its like this
An elephant and a dog are going to be tested. The scientists stick them infront of a mirror, and ask the question "are any of these creatures self-aware?"
The elephant acts like a typical self-aware creature is expected to. Grooming themselves and wondering what the mark on there head is. So we have gone from possibly self-aware to self-aware beyond resonable doubt.
The dog reacts in various ways, sometimes even attacking the mirror. In this case we cant be sure the dog is or isn't self-aware, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the elephant displayed the characteristics of how we expect a self-aware creature to act.
We may need a specialized test for the dog, but the test was useful in proving the elephant was self-aware.