Hunters are alert to movement -- as you say, a cat is optimised for certain activities. They do also have strong proprioception.
"That's my leg" or "that's my ear" seems a reasonable discovery for a cat. I doubt that there was a deep existential discovery because it happened in a mirror.
Of course, pets of a species will vary in ability, that's only normal variation. We love them because they are simple, pretty, calming, and sometimes even helpful.
The animals that we love less, we tend to eat.
There's an obvious cognitive limit compared to humans. The theory of mind in humans conjures intentionality everywhere. Despite the (sometimes wildly) erroneous notions that this can produce, there is value in cooperation. Assuming intentionality has been an evolutionary advantage for our species.
Our species domesticated cattle, horses, and dogs because we have what we call "empathy". It's our mind at work building assumptions about the other.
It doesn't take much for the human mind to start imagining intentionality and companionship. Jesse Bering [1] offers the example of the well-known film, The Red Balloon, in which a simple balloon becomes a little boy's companion.
Humans love their pets and often project human cognition onto them. It's a human thing. People often project traits onto their children as well. Pets usually avoid some of the worst effects of this projection. ^_^
> "That's my leg" or "that's my ear" seems a reasonable discovery for a cat. I doubt that there was a deep existential discovery because it happened in a mirror.
It does, except that mirrors are not truly a natural phenomenon (most animals, contrary to literature, never really see their reflection in the water, only a shadow). So there is a chance that something more fundamental and novel is going on in the cat's mind.
And in most people's experiences and the view of science, cats do not appear to ever understand it is them in the mirror, whereas other animals (some crows for example) definitely do.
Of course cats know they have ears in the sense that they can touch them themselves. And they know other cats have ears because they can observe them. The question is whether they understand that their ears are the same concept as other cats' ears.
This cat appears very clearly to be learning that, in real time.
Whereas other cats don't ever do this in mirrors. They try to reach the cat in the mirror, they try to outpace it, they try to attack it. They don't usually look in the mirror and then touch their own heads or bodies, and they are not known to be able to pass the mirror dot test, where only understanding that the reflection is actually _them_ should allow them to pass.
This cat looks very much like it could pass the mirror-dot test, and that could be of interest to science.
(Though given how sensitive cats are to things placed on their bodies, how routinely they clean their own faces, and the presence of whiskers on their face, it may actually be impossible to apply the mirror dot test in a way that is meaningful)
> Whereas other cats don't ever do this in mirrors. They try to reach the cat in the mirror, they try to outpace it, they try to attack it.
In my experience, most animals, including cats, just flat out ignore mirrors. At least all the pets I've had and that my family has had over the years, none of them ever reacted to themselves in the mirror.
In a way that suggests they do have some kind of understanding that they are just seeing themselves.
For my three cats, there was only an interesting reaction to themselves in a mirror the first time (or the first time in a long while; or sometimes the first time they experienced a specific mirror) they approached the mirror; then they seemed to ignore it (not sure if any picked up the use a mirror skill, as some cats in the article appear to have; I didn't notice it anyway). If you miss that first encounter, you missed it.
I had the same experience. My cat's first encounter with the mirror involved getting mad at the cat in the mirror and attacking it. Every other time after that, the mirror was completely ignored. They certainly did display cleverness in other contexts, such as figuring out how to open cabinets, or figuring out from the outside of the house which room we slept in so she could bang on the window to be let back in.
That's true of course. Mirrors (looking glasses) are a human construct made to please human psychology.
> So there is a chance that something more fundamental and novel is going on in the cat's mind.
The cat's reaction is interesting, I fully agree. It's a mammalian brain.
But humans will inevitably imagine much more. As part of modern inevitability, social media (another kind of mirror) will be monetised with the wildest speculation.
Next we'll have Feline Blockchain. (Please don't tell me... there is already a subreddit for it?)
Such confidence and such ignorance, a powerful combo. I recommend you go spend some more time around wild animals or you'll continue to have trouble seeing the continuity between us and "the animals". We could be better stewards.
The fact is that I am probably very much like you. Except that I won't throw barbs at a stranger who may in fact be a good person. Site rule: assume the best intentions. ^_^
I happen to love nature and animals. I guess we would agree about the terrible environmental consequences of human industry and consumerism. We have scaled the our greed and selfishness too far to hide it from ourselves anymore.
I'm not like you, bruv. I'd never un-ironically say "The animals that we love less, we tend to eat." Human-animal relations are a tad more complicated than that.
"That's my leg" or "that's my ear" seems a reasonable discovery for a cat. I doubt that there was a deep existential discovery because it happened in a mirror.
Of course, pets of a species will vary in ability, that's only normal variation. We love them because they are simple, pretty, calming, and sometimes even helpful.
The animals that we love less, we tend to eat.
There's an obvious cognitive limit compared to humans. The theory of mind in humans conjures intentionality everywhere. Despite the (sometimes wildly) erroneous notions that this can produce, there is value in cooperation. Assuming intentionality has been an evolutionary advantage for our species.
Our species domesticated cattle, horses, and dogs because we have what we call "empathy". It's our mind at work building assumptions about the other.
It doesn't take much for the human mind to start imagining intentionality and companionship. Jesse Bering [1] offers the example of the well-known film, The Red Balloon, in which a simple balloon becomes a little boy's companion.
https://slate.com/technology/2011/02/theory-of-mind-and-the-...
Humans love their pets and often project human cognition onto them. It's a human thing. People often project traits onto their children as well. Pets usually avoid some of the worst effects of this projection. ^_^
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Bering