Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a426c6e4294cd96e

Jump to content

Talk:Mirror test

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 9 days ago by ~2026-50462-49 in topic Robots section

Any objections: Expanding the mirror test to include odor and chemically based versions.

[edit]

Currently the article is about the vision based mirror test only, having alternatives like the odor-based version that dogs can pass under the criticism. Any objections to including Odor and chemical based "mirror" tests as a mirror test, remove the odor based mirror from the critisism section, and specify in the passed failed lists which version (odor/vision/chemical) was done? Sklabb (talk) 21:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Sklabb, I think this is a reasonable idea. I think we should keep the visual test as the "main" one, but it'd be good to have the variants described more fully. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

What does "abnormally good" mean?

[edit]

The statement about humans having "abnormally good vision" links to the article about the human eye. I've found no reference to any "abnormality" in human vision if we exclude the disease section, which talks in part about abnormally bad vision. I've found no reference to a comparative analysis of human vision performance in comparison to other animals, with animals being mentioned only once (as sharing a specific feature with the human eye, as opposed to having any differences). Since "abnormally good" is poorly defined and there is no evidence supporting it, and possibly the opposite (for instance, many birds of prey have exceptionally good visual acuity, even if I don't have a reference to a comparison with human vision), I suggest to remove this statement. I do not dispute the larger statement, that the "rouge" test may be easier to pass for animals with better visual acuity. I wouldn't without my glasses on, and I think I am conscious. A1957 (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

The only abnormal thing about human vision is that human retina is wired inside-out. Although this abnormality is not unique to humans. 80.93.240.67 (talk) 13:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

People with dementia failing MSM

[edit]

You can go on yt and see dozens of examples of this. Feels worth mentioning! Bit of a show stopper as a definition of "self-awareness" Hamishtodd1 (talk) 15:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

How do crabs pass MSM test while gorillas, parrots, etc fail?

[edit]

Is there a caveat with the study that explains this? Does anyone that know more have thoughts on this? 2600:1014:B1E5:C646:A8A1:823C:8F5A:5BC1 (talk) 15:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

For gorillas see https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9334443/. This article recommends that mirror tests meet strict criteria before making a claim one way or another regarding a species' cogitive skills here. Gorillas' habit of seeing direct eye-contact as a threat, for example, may interfere with them exploring the mirror's qualities. It recommends using angled mirrors or live TV cameras as workarounds. Monkeywire (talk) 19:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Robots section

[edit]

The robots section is extremely sparse, it should either be expanded or removed ~2026-50462-49 (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply