From what little I've seen about it so far, it looks
to me like some people actually believe dogs are not
aware of themselves simply because they don't appear
to recognise their reflection in a mirror. To me that only
means they don't understand a mirror, and has absolutely
nothing to do with whether or not they have a mental
concept of themselves.

The facts that they have a mental concept of their
objects, their territory, their urine, their body, etc, are
all indications that they have a mental concept of
themselves, imo.

The fact that they are aware of different individual
beings is a very strong indication that they are aware
of themselves as an individual also imo, especially
when considered along with the fact that they have
a mental concept of the other things they encounter.

Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?

dh@. wrote in message ...
Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?

My puppy discovered the mirror today, and showed
great interest in the other puppy in there. My experience
has been that my dogs lose interest in mirrors pretty
quickly. Whether they do so because they realize
it's their own reflection, because the other dog never
comes out of the mirror, or because the other dog
has no smell is anybody's guess. I've never seen
one have an "Aha!" moment about it though.

As for dog's having a sense of self, I would agree with
that. They recognize other dogs and people as
individuals, and I don't think they'd do that unless they
were themselves individuals.

Bizby

dh@. wrote:

From what little I've seen about it so far, it looks
to me like some people actually believe dogs are not
aware of themselves simply because they don't appear
to recognise their reflection in a mirror.

Not "only" because of that, ****wit. But the mirror
test *IS* a widely acknowledged test of self-awareness
among researchers into animal intelligence, and dogs
fail it.


To me that only
means they don't understand a mirror, and has absolutely
nothing to do with whether or not they have a mental
concept of themselves.

You aren't an animal intelligence researcher, ****wit.

Dogs do NOT give any evidence of self awareness,
****wit. They give NO evidence of understanding that
they exist at a particular place and time.

You can't even *define* self awareness, ****wit, so
everything you say about whether or not dogs have it is
meaningless. You simply don't know what you're talking
about. Once again, it's just standard ****wit David
Harrison bullshit.



The facts that they have a mental concept of their
objects, their territory, their urine, their body, etc, are
all indications that they have a mental concept of
themselves, imo.

Your opinion is based on ignorance and deceit, ****wit.
Your opinion doesn't matter.

http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198intell...198debate.html


The fact that they are aware of different individual
beings

Are they, ****wit? What kind of awareness do they
have, ****wit? How do you know?

is a very strong indication that they are aware
of themselves as an individual also imo,

I always love your stupid "imo", ****wit. It's the
proof positive that you don't know what the **** you're
talking about. You're just bullshitting.

There is no logical connection between what you say is
dogs' awareness of other beings and their supposed self
awareness; no logical connection at all. You've merely
said it exists, without any foundation for your belief.

The general consensus in the literature is that
self-awareness represents a complex, multifaceted
neuro-socio-cognitive process (Morin, 2003). It is the
capacity to become the object of one’s own attention
(Duval and Wicklund, 1972) and to actively identify,
process, and store information about the self. It
consists in an awareness of one’s own private
self-aspects such as mental states (e.g., perceptions,
sensations, attitudes, intentions, emotions) and public
self-characteristics (e.g., one’s body, behaviors,
general physical appearance). Self-awareness also
includes knowing that we are the same person across
time, that we are the author of our thoughts and
actions, and that we are distinct from the environment
(Kircher and David, 2003). Thus self-awareness leads to
the realization that one exists as an independent and
unique entity in the world, and that this existence
will eventually cease.

http://human-nature.com/ep/reviews/ep01161171.html


Dogs do not meet any of that definition.

Consider the mental life of a dog, for example.
Presumably, dogs have a rich array of experiences (they
feel pain and pleasure, the tree has a particular
"look" to it) and they may even have beliefs about the
world (Fido believes that his supper dish is empty).
Who knows, they may even have special "inner
experiences" that accompany those beliefs. However, if
we assume that dogs are not self-aware in the stronger
sense, then they will lack the ability to critically
reflect upon their beliefs and experiences and thus
will be unable to have other beliefs about their
pleasure or their supper-dish-belief (what philosophers
call "second-order beliefs" or "meta-beliefs"). That is
to say, they may lack the ability to judge that
pleasure may be an unworthy objective in a certain
situation or to judge that their belief that the supper
dish is empty is unjustified.

http://www.ptproject.ilstu.edu/sfaw1.htm


****wit, you are clueless. You will NEVER understand
self-awareness, and why no scientist believes dogs
possess it. Instead, you'll keep blabbering stupidly
about "imo".

"diddy" wrote in message
...
Bizby
i sent you an article at the end of a letter today that I thought you
might
find helpful. Please let me know you got it.

Yes, I did, thanks. I've glanced at it and will read it in depth as soon
as I get a chance.

Bizby

Barneys first experience with his reflection came when I went to an ATM
machine. He saw his reflection and totally flipped out at the other dog.
Over time he came to understand that this other dog in the glass wasn't mean
and he didn't have to go into attack mode........LOL Brandy never paid much
attention to mirrors or reflections.

Celeste

dh@. wrote in message ...
From what little I've seen about it so far, it looks
to me like some people actually believe dogs are not
aware of themselves simply because they don't appear
to recognise their reflection in a mirror. To me that only
means they don't understand a mirror, and has absolutely
nothing to do with whether or not they have a mental
concept of themselves.

The facts that they have a mental concept of their
objects, their territory, their urine, their body, etc, are
all indications that they have a mental concept of
themselves, imo.

The fact that they are aware of different individual
beings is a very strong indication that they are aware
of themselves as an individual also imo, especially
when considered along with the fact that they have
a mental concept of the other things they encounter.

Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?

dh@. wrote:

Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?

At this point, at the risk of getting a bit personal, I have to conclude
that we have a B.S. artist and a troll on our hands who debates more
like a backwoods evangelist than a scientist, appealing to rhetoric and
semantics rather than hard data. DH has pretty much ignored my numerous
posts and the reference URLs which I have provided, and is obstinately
arguing in circles repeating the same questions which I've already
answered. I'm afraid he has already made up his mind a long time ago and
will never consider yielding his position on this topic no matter what
anybody says :-/

You know DH, you don't have to admit that you might be wrong if it's
THAT embarrassing for you, or if you just don't quite understand the
experiments Rudy and I have mentioned. You could simply say something
like "you people make some interesting points, but I don't think the
evidence is fully conclusive either way, I just feel in my own personal
opinion that animals must at some level have a sense of self-awareness"
and just leave it at that, and you could back out gracefully and not
lose anybody's respect. But all you do is like to do is argue.

- Logic316



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

dh@. wrote:
Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?


At this point, at the risk of getting a bit personal, I have to conclude
that we have a B.S. artist and a troll on our hands who debates more
like a backwoods evangelist than a scientist, appealing to rhetoric and
semantics rather than hard data. DH has pretty much ignored my numerous
posts and the reference URLs which I have provided, and is obstinately
arguing in circles repeating the same questions which I've already
answered. I'm afraid he has already made up his mind a long time ago and
will never consider yielding his position on this topic no matter what
anybody says :-/

You know DH, you don't have to admit that you might be wrong if it's
THAT embarrassing for you, or if you just don't fully understand the
experiments Rudy and I have mentioned. You could simply say something
like "you people make some interesting points, but I don't think the
evidence is fully conclusive either way, I just feel in my own personal
opinion that animals must at some level have a sense of self-awareness"
and just leave it at that, and you could back out gracefully and not
lose anybody's respect. But all you do is like to argue!

- Logic316



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

dh@. wrote:
Question: Has anyone ever managed to get a dog
to understand that it can see its reflection in a mirror,
and if so, did it appear to experience a great revelation
about its own existence at the instant it learned to do so?


At this point, at the risk of getting a bit personal, I have to conclude
that we have a B.S. artist and a troll on our hands who debates more
like a backwoods evangelist than a scientist, appealing to rhetoric and
semantics rather than hard data. DH has pretty much ignored my numerous
posts and the reference URLs which I have provided, and is obstinately
arguing in circles repeating the same questions which I've already
answered. I'm afraid he has already made up his mind a long time ago and
will never consider yielding his position on this topic no matter what
anybody says :-/

You know DH, you don't have to admit that you might be wrong if it's
THAT embarrassing for you, or if you just don't quite understand the
experiments Rudy and I have mentioned. You could simply say something
like "you people make some interesting points, but I don't think the
evidence is fully conclusive either way, I just feel in my own personal
opinion that animals must at some level have a sense of self-awareness"
and just leave it at that, and you could back out gracefully and not
lose anybody's respect. But all like to do is argue!

- Logic316



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