Mirrors that don’t reflect

What would happen to a person born today where it is possible to make a monitor into a mirror that, through clever manipulation, shows all your movements but as another person? What if that reflection was the image of you with another gender or ethnicity? 

What would our lives be like if this was done?

What do our reflections teach us?

I asked ChatGPT, “Can you tell in around 200 words what a person sees when they look in a mirror?” 

When a person looks in a mirror, they see a reflection of themselves, but not exactly as others see them. The mirror shows a reversed image, flipping left and right. For example, if you raise your right hand, it appears as though your left hand is raised in the reflection. This reversal happens because mirrors reflect light back directly from the surface.

What you see is influenced by the quality of the mirror and lighting conditions. In bright light, details like skin texture, hair, and colors are vivid, whereas dim lighting softens those features. Facial expressions and body movements are mirrored instantly, creating a sense of interaction with yourself.

The experience of looking in a mirror is also shaped by perception. Some people focus on imperfections, while others may feel a sense of self-connection or even disconnection, depending on their mood or self-esteem. Mirrors can evoke strong emotional responses, from confidence to self-criticism.

In summary, when looking in a mirror, a person sees a reversed but accurate visual representation of themselves, colored by both physical factors and personal perception. It’s a blend of the external image and the internal experience of self-awareness.

Then I elaborated: can you put some more philosophical thought into it

When a person gazes into a mirror, they encounter more than just a reversed image; they confront the essence of self. The mirror reflects not only the physical appearance—flipping left and right—but also becomes a metaphor for self-perception, identity, and the tension between how we see ourselves and how we are seen by others.

The physical reflection is immediate: facial features, expressions, and movements are captured in precise detail. But beyond that, the mirror acts as a portal into introspection. It asks, “Who am I?”—not just in terms of appearance but as a being. In this sense, the mirror becomes a silent witness to our inner struggles, aspirations, and insecurities.

Philosophers have long pondered the mirror as a symbol of self-awareness, with thinkers like Lacan suggesting that the moment we recognize ourselves in the mirror is a key step in the development of the ego. But this recognition is fraught with paradoxes: we see ourselves as an object, and yet, we know we are more than just the body reflected back.

Thus, looking in a mirror can evoke a subtle existential reflection. It reveals not just what we look like, but forces us to reckon with the fragmented and layered nature of our own identity, shaped by time, memory, and perception.

and now more scientific 

When a person looks into a mirror, the experience is grounded in the principles of optics and visual perception. Mirrors work by reflecting light in a predictable way, following the law of reflection: the angle of incidence (the angle at which light hits the mirror) is equal to the angle of reflection (the angle at which it bounces off). This reflection creates a virtual image that appears behind the mirror, where the rays of light seem to converge.

The image is laterally inverted, meaning left and right are reversed, though the image remains the same size as the object. This reversal occurs because the mirror reflects light directly back along the path it came from, flipping the orientation relative to the vertical axis.

Perceptually, the brain processes this reflected image as though it were real, although it understands the inversion. The human visual system is adept at integrating the flipped image, interpreting it instantly as a representation of the self. Interestingly, this mirrored version is different from how others see us, since we usually view ourselves only in reflections, which can shape our self-image differently than what others perceive.

The interaction of light, reflection, and brain processing forms a seamless experience of looking into a mirror, where physical reality meets the mind’s interpretation of self.

At last, I also asked this: what would happen if the mirror is a monitor that mimics your movements as another person , and this is the only mirror you have ever seen.

If a person grew up with a “mirror” that was actually a monitor mimicking their movements as another person, their perception of self would be profoundly different from what we consider normal. In this scenario, the person would never have seen their own reflection as it truly is but would instead believe that the image on the screen—this other person—is their true identity.

From a psychological perspective, this could deeply shape their sense of identity and self-awareness. Since humans rely heavily on visual feedback to understand and form self-image, the person would internalize the other person’s appearance as their own. Every time they moved or gestured, the visual feedback would reinforce the idea that this different face and body were theirs. Over time, the brain would likely adapt to this constant reinforcement, accepting this foreign image as an accurate representation of the self.

This situation could lead to a cognitive dissonance if the person ever encountered their real image later in life. The sudden mismatch between their internalized self-concept and reality might cause confusion or even identity crises. It would also challenge fundamental aspects of self-recognition, a key developmental milestone. The way they interact socially, based on this “false” self-image, could lead to misunderstandings or disconnections with how others perceive them.

In this thought experiment, the consequences would blend science and philosophy—exploring how much of our self is constructed through external feedback and whether identity can exist independently of an accurate reflection of reality.

And, of course, what does Nietzsche say about mirrors?

Friedrich Nietzsche did not focus extensively on mirrors in a literal sense, but he did use them as a metaphor in his philosophical writings, particularly in relation to self-examination, truth, and the nature of human perception. For Nietzsche, mirrors often symbolize a reflection of the self or society’s expectations, and they serve as a tool for exploring deeper questions about identity and reality.

1. Self-Reflection and Truth: Nietzsche believed that the human search for truth is often self-deceptive. A mirror might symbolize the illusion of objective truth, reflecting back only what we project onto it. He challenged the notion that we can see ourselves or the world as they truly are, emphasizing that what we perceive is filtered through subjective interpretations. In “Beyond Good and Evil”, Nietzsche talks about how individuals often don’t see themselves honestly, implying that the “mirror” they look into is distorted by social, moral, and cultural conditioning.
2. Mirrors and Self-Overcoming: Nietzsche also uses mirrors to discuss self-overcoming—the idea that one must confront their limitations, false beliefs, and illusions to create a more authentic self. In “Thus Spoke Zarathustra”, the protagonist speaks about the need to destroy past illusions, suggesting that we must “shatter” the mirrors that reflect back societal norms and moral judgments, in order to become the “Übermensch” (overman), who creates their own values and identity.
3. Mirrors and Masks: Nietzsche often explored the concept of masks and appearances. In some sense, a mirror shows us the mask we wear in front of the world, not our true nature. Nietzsche encouraged people to embrace the idea of constructing their identity, recognizing that the “self” is fluid and performative rather than fixed and easily reflected by a mirror.

In summary, Nietzsche’s engagement with mirrors is largely metaphorical, exploring themes of self-deception, societal conditioning, and the struggle for authenticity. Mirrors reflect not the truth, but the illusions and constructs we have internalized.

As a side note, I don’t value the answers of these chatbots particularly high, but they can function as some sort of equalizer, finding the average answer. As far as I know, these bots can find all the “answers” to these kinds of questions and so predict the average words that follow each other to make coherent sentences and thus produce an answer. To clarify, they don’t answer it but produce a sentence that can function as an answer.

I had to ask ChatGPT. 

I generate responses by analyzing the information you’ve provided and combining it with the knowledge I’ve been trained on. Here’s a breakdown of how it works:

• Context Understanding: First, I process your question to understand its meaning, nuances, and the kind of response you’re seeking. For example, if you’re asking about mirrors, I need to identify if you’re asking from a scientific, philosophical, or another perspective.

• Knowledge Retrieval: I then retrieve relevant information from my training, which includes a wide range of topics like science, philosophy, psychology, history, and more. My knowledge comes from processing vast amounts of text—books, academic papers, websites, and other sources—up until my last update in 2023.

• Synthesis: Next, I synthesize the relevant information into a cohesive response. I don’t just retrieve facts; I try to combine them in a way that makes sense in the context of your question. For example, if you ask for a philosophical view on mirrors, I’ll draw on philosophical theories related to perception and identity.

• Tailoring: Finally, I adjust the tone and complexity of my answer based on how you’ve framed your question. If you want something simple, I’ll keep it concise. If you’re seeking a deeper, more nuanced explanation, I’ll go into more detail.

All of this happens in real time, allowing me to provide an answer quickly.