4 ms·

I think an animal capable of self recognition may still fail the mirror test if visual sense is not their primary window to the world. Take a hypothetical exam

by srean 13y ago

I think an animal capable of self recognition may still fail the mirror test if visual sense is not their primary window to the world. Take a hypothetical example, say we were presented with a non-visual smell mirror, would we pay it any attention, let alone recognize or identify ourselves in it ? Highly unlikely, on the other hand an animal like scent-hound might find such a thing interesting.

MattHeard 13y ago
How would one construct a smell mirror?
- hcentipede 13y ago
  Human centipede basically.
  - enraged_camel 13y ago
    What blows my mind is that you created an account seemingly just to make this unfunny joke.
- renox 13y ago
  How about a "sound mirror"? Bats and dolphin in a way "view" sounds with their echolocation..
  - ars 13y ago
    A sound mirror is just a wall.
    - chad_oliver 13y ago
      To be fair, a visual mirror is just a special type of wall.
    - tripzilch 13y ago
      It has to be a very very flat and even wall, otherwise the echo image will be distorted or "blurry". Such do not really appear in nature. Just like the only natural equivalent to a visual mirror is a very still pond, viewed under an angle.
  - YokoZar 13y ago
    For echolocation to work, you'd basically need some sort of mold of the animal itself that moved in real-time to match it.
- ANTSANTS 13y ago
  Stick your nose in your armpit?
- Mandatum 13y ago
  I'd look at the technology behind "Smell O Rama": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scent_technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scent_technology It's a gimmick they used in the early 50's, adding associated smells to movies. I'm not sure about on-the-fly smell creation though.
- morganherlocker 13y ago
  One biologist has attempted to create a test with dogs. The basic hypothesis is that dogs should be able to recognize their own urine if they can detect "self" through smell. The results so far have been inconclusive[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test#Animals_with_a_non-visual_primary_sense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test#Animals_with_a_non-...
- jengamaster 13y ago
  I think the hardest part of creating a mirror for these other kinds of senses would be the fact that you need to be able to modify the 'reflected medium' in such a way that you can: 1: Determine if the subject is capable of detecting the modification 2: Determine if the subject has detected the modification 3: Have the subject acknowledge that they are the subject of the modification by attempting to correct it. I guess hearing a crow clear his throat would be an indication of sentience.
ars 13y ago
> I think an animal capable of self recognition may still fail the mirror test if visual sense is not their primary window to the world. You first do the mirror test with many animals that do primarily use vision. Then you rank those using a different test - if you pick your alternate test properly it can act as a proxy to the mirror test. Then you test your target animal to see how it does on the proxy test.
- negativity 13y ago
  Hmmm, okay, let me think this through a little bit. An elephant passes the mirror test. An elephant can be trained to brush it's own teeth. Over time, a well-trained elephant develops an understanding that the habit of dental care is beneficial and rewarding, and teaches other elephants to do the same. Thus, we might conclude that all tooth brushing elephants are sentient, self-aware beings. This would mean that some of the possible pre-requisites for intelligent life are now either eyes OR teeth... Now, to extend beyond elephants, we'd need to find another behavior, trait or defining aspect that elephants can share with another species that humans cannot. Thus if elephants must be the bridge-species to self-aware-intellect without natural eyes, they must carry three intelligence defining attributes. 1. Eyes, to relate to humans, enabling primary confirmation 2. Teeth, as a shared attribute, for secondary confirmation, especially in elephants stricken blind by randomized misfortune 3. Other: something that does not relate to humans, but can confirm intellect So, sticking with elephants, let's say elephants have a prehensile tentacle like organ, in that they can grasp and articulate objects with their trunk. This means that elephants can see themselves in the mirror, so humans can know that elephants are fellows in individualized personal experience. A sighted elephant might manage to teach a blind elephant to brush it's own teeth, thus, elephants that fail the mirror test can still be confirmed as intelligent, if they can carry the capacity to brush their own teeth. Elephants can be encouraged to brush their own teeth, and hypothetically devise opportunities to teach other creatures to do the same, if they recognize that the other creatures have teeth, but no eyes. Emphasis on the HYPOTHETICALLY, since this is a thought experiment. Elephants, furthermore, can reach beyond the normal capacity for humans to recognize intelligence, in that they can operate their trunks in a manner that confirms intelligence in other creatures with trunk-like appendages, such as ant-eaters, snakes, octopuses, squids, worms and even certain, very long slugs. Now, given that elephants act as the bridge species to these other creatures, could we extend beyond elephants, and use elephants to confirm intellect in these other creatures that can confirm intellect in creatures humans and elephants, otherwise, cannot? Does this hold hypothetical water? Possibly, but man, does it ever feel like a long shot. It's like the Monty Python test for a witch. How about insects? For example, what if we start with bees as a likely candidate? How do we confirm self-awareness in bees? Could we extend this logic from bees, and beyond, over to another type of insect, through a recognition of mutual traits shared with bees?
qwerta 13y ago
Intelligence as we define it is very much tied to visual world.

by srean 13y ago

MattHeard 13y ago

How would one construct a smell mirror?

hcentipede 13y ago
Human centipede basically.
- enraged_camel 13y ago
  What blows my mind is that you created an account seemingly just to make this unfunny joke.
renox 13y ago
How about a "sound mirror"? Bats and dolphin in a way "view" sounds with their echolocation..
- ars 13y ago
  A sound mirror is just a wall.
  - chad_oliver 13y ago
    To be fair, a visual mirror is just a special type of wall.
  - tripzilch 13y ago
    It has to be a very very flat and even wall, otherwise the echo image will be distorted or "blurry". Such do not really appear in nature. Just like the only natural equivalent to a visual mirror is a very still pond, viewed under an angle.
- YokoZar 13y ago
  For echolocation to work, you'd basically need some sort of mold of the animal itself that moved in real-time to match it.
ANTSANTS 13y ago
Stick your nose in your armpit?
Mandatum 13y ago
I'd look at the technology behind "Smell O Rama": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scent_technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scent_technology It's a gimmick they used in the early 50's, adding associated smells to movies. I'm not sure about on-the-fly smell creation though.
morganherlocker 13y ago
One biologist has attempted to create a test with dogs. The basic hypothesis is that dogs should be able to recognize their own urine if they can detect "self" through smell. The results so far have been inconclusive[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test#Animals_with_a_non-visual_primary_sense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test#Animals_with_a_non-...
jengamaster 13y ago
I think the hardest part of creating a mirror for these other kinds of senses would be the fact that you need to be able to modify the 'reflected medium' in such a way that you can: 1: Determine if the subject is capable of detecting the modification 2: Determine if the subject has detected the modification 3: Have the subject acknowledge that they are the subject of the modification by attempting to correct it. I guess hearing a crow clear his throat would be an indication of sentience.

ars 13y ago

> I think an animal capable of self recognition may still fail the mirror test if visual sense is not their primary window to the world. You first do the mirror test with many animals that do primarily use vision. Then you rank those using a different test - if you pick your alternate test properly it can act as a proxy to the mirror test. Then you test your target animal to see how it does on the proxy test.

negativity 13y ago
Hmmm, okay, let me think this through a little bit. An elephant passes the mirror test. An elephant can be trained to brush it's own teeth. Over time, a well-trained elephant develops an understanding that the habit of dental care is beneficial and rewarding, and teaches other elephants to do the same. Thus, we might conclude that all tooth brushing elephants are sentient, self-aware beings. This would mean that some of the possible pre-requisites for intelligent life are now either eyes OR teeth... Now, to extend beyond elephants, we'd need to find another behavior, trait or defining aspect that elephants can share with another species that humans cannot. Thus if elephants must be the bridge-species to self-aware-intellect without natural eyes, they must carry three intelligence defining attributes. 1. Eyes, to relate to humans, enabling primary confirmation 2. Teeth, as a shared attribute, for secondary confirmation, especially in elephants stricken blind by randomized misfortune 3. Other: something that does not relate to humans, but can confirm intellect So, sticking with elephants, let's say elephants have a prehensile tentacle like organ, in that they can grasp and articulate objects with their trunk. This means that elephants can see themselves in the mirror, so humans can know that elephants are fellows in individualized personal experience. A sighted elephant might manage to teach a blind elephant to brush it's own teeth, thus, elephants that fail the mirror test can still be confirmed as intelligent, if they can carry the capacity to brush their own teeth. Elephants can be encouraged to brush their own teeth, and hypothetically devise opportunities to teach other creatures to do the same, if they recognize that the other creatures have teeth, but no eyes. Emphasis on the HYPOTHETICALLY, since this is a thought experiment. Elephants, furthermore, can reach beyond the normal capacity for humans to recognize intelligence, in that they can operate their trunks in a manner that confirms intelligence in other creatures with trunk-like appendages, such as ant-eaters, snakes, octopuses, squids, worms and even certain, very long slugs. Now, given that elephants act as the bridge species to these other creatures, could we extend beyond elephants, and use elephants to confirm intellect in these other creatures that can confirm intellect in creatures humans and elephants, otherwise, cannot? Does this hold hypothetical water? Possibly, but man, does it ever feel like a long shot. It's like the Monty Python test for a witch. How about insects? For example, what if we start with bees as a likely candidate? How do we confirm self-awareness in bees? Could we extend this logic from bees, and beyond, over to another type of insect, through a recognition of mutual traits shared with bees?

qwerta 13y ago

Intelligence as we define it is very much tied to visual world.