[paidleaf]

> Interesting idea, that the mirror test for dogs is unfair because their vision sucks compared to their nose, but this reasoning seems to take quite a leap.

This has been a decades old complaint about the mirror test. It is a human biased test which favors the visual over other senses. Different animals use different senses. It would be like giving the mirror test to a blind person and then claiming the guy wasn't self aware.

Then there is the entire about what "self-aware" means, especially in the current environment where the "self" has taken quite a philosophical and scientific beating where the "self" like the "soul" appears to be a man-made illusion/fantasy.

> I love dogs, and don’t doubt for a moment they have some level of self-awareness similar to our own, but to me, this test stinks.

This is an age old philosophical problem. Should we expect a dog or any animal to have "self-awareness similar to our own"? If so, is it even possible to verify it either way? Considering our brains are different, is it even physically possibly for two species to be "self-aware" in the same sense of the word?