Talk:Empathic mimicry

Ability Naming Conventions
The following sources are used for determining evolved human ability names, in order:
1. Canon Sources	Episodes
2. Near-canon Sources	Webisodes, Graphic Novels, iStories, Heroes Evolutions
3. Secondary Sources	Episode commentary, Interviews, Heroes: Survival
4. Common names for abilities	Names from other works
5. Descriptions of abilities	Descriptions
6. Possessor's name	If no non-speculative description is possible
Note: The highlighted row represents the level of the source used to determine empathic mimicry's name.
Source/Explanation
Based on statement by Claude and description by Mohinder in The Fix.

}

Archives	Archived Topics
Dec 2006-Feb 2007	Great layout • Examples • Not his power! • Proximity • Votes • Making the move • Range: Claire vs. Claude • Distractions • Does mimicry equal acquisition? • The dreams and visions... my new theory. • Paint Cans • Eden's Power

The time-stopping.

I'd keep that in there and move the "may or may not have" section. It makes sense to keep at least one occurance of each power in that list, and put the powers used more than once (invisibility, telekinesis) on the examples page. --Riddler 00:41, 2 March 2007 (EST)

• I went back and forth on that example. Because there was so much talk about it, I figured I'd take it out of the main page. It doesn't really matter one way or the other though, since it's on the examples of empathic mimicry page. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2007 (EST)
  • I am still on the side that he did not stop time ---- And I think that the episode "Parasite" proves it. Sylar used TK to stop the bullet in midair --- much like Peter used TK to stop the tazers. I am now completely confident that I am right. I was a little iffy about it and was more like "Well there is not enough evidence to prove either way" and was hoping that it would be moved to unconfirmed. However, now I think people should totally not convey that it was STM until there is more proof that Peter can use STM. But I know that that will never happen on this board.Guy 09:30, 7 March 2007 (EST)
    • All I can say is listen to the audio when Peter is shot with the tazer. It's the biggest giveaway that he stopped time to do it. Just because two powers can be uses to stop a bullet doesn't mean they're the same power. (Admin 09:35, 7 March 2007 (EST))
      • Okay so that is one point of evidence to four or five counter evidence that Peter used TK. If Hiro stopped time, that means that Peter could not absorb his ability, because it takes TIME to absorb an ability. He is normally in the vicinity for at least a few moments usually minutes. If there was not just a short amount of time, but NO TIME then he could not absorb that ability. Claude is moving during the scene. If he would have stopped time that does not explain why it just dropped to the ground. Sylar, who to this point has never produced anything similar to STM, completed the same feat with TK. At no other time, does Peter show that he can use STM (other than this mentioned here). Hiro has the ability to move and manipulate things during STM and can STM with objects and other people making it completely simple to "awaken" peter during the time stop scene (especially after many 'unconfirmed' years of study and discipline to hone a skill) I am convinced that Peter not only didn't use STM, but CAN'T use STM till he meets Hiro in person, which I discern, is the significance of him only meeting Ando in Texas.
        • Nobody on this board has denied that Peter used TK with the Taser darts. The point of contention is not whether he used TK, it's whether he used STM. Evidence in favor of the former does not count as evidence against the latter. Since there is solid give-away evidence that he did use STM, and there has been no good evidence presented that he did not, it should stand as probable that he did.--E rowe 11:28, 7 March 2007 (EST)
        • Also, as to there being other evidence that Peter can use STM, we already have it. He used it when he met Future Hiro.--E rowe 11:30, 7 March 2007 (EST)
        • It should also be noted that Peter spent a few minutes (from his point of view) talking with Future Hiro, so he definitely had the opportunity to absorb the power. --Ted C 11:33, 7 March 2007 (EST)
          • Since I'm not sure if these boards have really laid out the evidence that Peter absorbed STM when he met Future Hiro, I'll do that now. The scene begins with a shot panning around the people in the subway car frozen in time before it zooms back to show the back of Future Hiro walking alone. The audience can then see both Mohindar and Peter standing frozen in time at the end of the car. When Hiro gets close Peter unfreezes because of having absorbed Hiro's power when he came in range. Peter turns around and Hiro takes a second before recognizing him. Although it is now apparent that Hiro can extend the use of his power to include others, and Future Hiro is presumably more skilled with is power than we have seen with present Hiro, the order of events in the subway indicate that Peter was not brought into the time freeze by Hiro, but he entered it himself before Hiro recognized him.--E rowe 11:57, 7 March 2007 (EST)
            • The idea that Peter used space-time manipulation is pretty clear to me. However, since there have such ardent dissenters, we have tried to make it quite vague. It's listed on the examples page as an absorbed power. On this page, it's listed under the limits as a reproduced power, but the only example is listed as a "possible example". It's also listed on Peter's page. In the end, we have to mention it, since so many believe it's quite clear. However, we must also recognize those that strongly believe otherwise. Because it's a somewhat gray area, I think we have done a nice job of straddling the line to appease both camps. Calling it a "possible example" allows for doubt, and mentioning Future Hiro lends support. I think our wording has handled the situation as best as possible. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 12:23, 7 March 2007 (EST)
              • The wording is "Peter slowed and then stopped time when attacked with taser darts" and doesn't appear to leave ANY room for doubt. rewording it to something like "Peter possibly slowed and then stopped time when attacked with taser darts" and make some mention of the possibility of it being TK.--Joedu 15:34, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
                • I think when Peter is having his vision with Charles in it, he asks if he is time-travelling. To me this suggested that he knows he can manipulate time, but not able to really control it, especially since he's passed out. OUChevelleSS 13:46, 22 May 2007 (EDT)
• Not that NBC has the best track record when it comes to accuracy, but I'll mention for posterity that on the Heroes site one of their pictures from the episode is explained as "While Claude and Peter discuss evolution on the rooftop, a dart hits Claude in the neck – the Haitian and Mr. Bennet have come calling. Peter stops the dart meant for him by freezing time. He then throws Claude off the rooftop and flies to the rescue in order to make their escape." (Admin 00:16, 16 May 2007 (EDT))
• After reviewing a video of the scene in question, it seemed that the darts fell to the ground after Peter supposedly froze time. If Peter froze time, wouldn't the darts just continue to strike him after he stopped the timefreeze? Additionally, it appears that the darts were quivering in mid-air. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9xcdfJfQ6Y) Thrashmeister 21:10, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Yes, the darts would continue if Peter only used Hiro's power, but the consensus is that Peter froze time, then used telekinesis to drop the darts. The thing that made it obvious that Peter stopped time was that Bennet and the Haitian were frozen in time.--Ice Vision 21:14, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
    • In that video is that someones breath frozen it time? -Lөvөl 11:34, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
• People keep saying that the sound effects prove that Peter stopped time. However, when watching the episodes online, I've noticed that whenever Hiro stops time, there is a very distinctive sound, and it's nothing like what we hear when Peter stops the taser darts in Unexpected. You can listen to samples of the time stopping sound here: [1] [2] [3] [4] from One Giant Leap, Godsend, Five Years Gone (this time it's Future Peter), and The Hard Part, respectively. You can listen to the scene from Unexpected here: [5]. We never hear that time stopping sound when Peter stops the tasers. I don't think we hear anything but the clicking noise slowing down. We never hear the background noise slowing down when Hiro stops time, either. Even in One Giant Leap when he stops time midway through the truck crash, the sound of the truck crashing into the stall simply stops. It doesn't sound like the scene of Hiro slowing then reversing time for Hope's gun and bullet either. You can listen to that scene here: [6] Also, we never hear the clicking noise start again in Unexpected. If he had stopped time, shouldn't the noise have started back up again as soon as time restarted? Conduit 18:12, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
  • I can listen to it again, but once time started back up I heard the taser clicking resume briefly. (Admin 18:27, 11 June 2007 (EDT))
    • I don't hear anything like that. Shortly after the taser darts start dropping, if I listen closely, I can just barely make out something that sounds a little like crickets (it might be part of the music), but it's very different from the taser clicking sound. Listen to the beginning with the clicking sound, then skip directly to the end, and you'll see the difference. Conduit 18:46, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
    • So, does anyone else have anything to say about this? Conduit 12:27, 17 June 2007 (EDT)
      • Nope. Consensus is already that it is indeed an example of him stopping time plus as supporting evidence NBC's site says he stopped time (see above). If new material (such as an interview where they discuss that scene) is released then we can revisit this issue. (Admin 12:39, 17 June 2007 (EDT))
        • Agree, Admin. You know, I was a little skeptical of what power it was after the first viewing way back when, and so I stayed out of the conversation a bit. Since then I've watched that scene may 8 or 9 times in different contexts, and it seems very obvious to me (from visual clues and audio clues) that Peter stopped time to stop the tasers in midair, then used telekinesis to make them drop to the ground. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:55, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

Two things on the time stopping

How could it be TK with the sound effects? Also if you look, there is no blinking electrical light from the Haitian's tazer. There is on Bennet's before contact with Claude. Claude is also moving very slowly, definitely not spasming as quickly as he would with voltage moving through his body.

In response to 'Peter didn't have enough contact with Future Hiro to absorb his power', he had just about as much contact time as he did with Claire prior to healing, and he still was able to use it. OUChevelleSS 17:23, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

(Sorry I'm new, feel free to move this into the other thread where I intended, unless I figure it out first).

Multi-power Use

I'm having an issue with the whole "invisibility and TK" at the same time claim. As I said, you can't conclusively say that someone who is invisible is using telekinesis, unless he's partially visible while the cup is moving toward him. Is there an image from the episode that would settle this question? --Ted C 16:24, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

Here ya go.--Ice Vision 16:31, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

• OK, I can work with that. I'm wondering if we should use it in the article. --Ted C 16:34, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
  • I've fiddled with working it into the page. It won't work as a thumb. Is this acceptable? Any other options? --Ted C 16:41, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
    • An animation only works when it's at full size. It looks fine on the page. I've also put the same image into the galleries of examples of empathic mimicry, examples of invisibility and examples of telekinesis. It doesn't animate unless you click on the image, so the caption reads something like "Watch as Peter uses two powers at once." — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
      • Animations are also very large files and should be used very sparingly. Personally I'd rather we didn't use them in articles at all. They're often over 10x larger than static images. (Admin 22:13, 29 May 2007 (EDT))
• I noticed that he starts to turn visible almost immediately after the cup begins to move. Isn't it possible that he switched to telekinesis without turning visible first, and it took a short time for the invisibility to fade? In The Fix, after Claude walks out of Peter's range (we see him fade from view from Peter's perspective), Peter stays invsible for a few seconds before fading back into view. Conduit 19:11, 22 May 2007 (EDT)
  • It's possible, but I think any conclusion remains speculative and not deductively established. It's possible that he just hadn't learned to control the ability to become invisible when not in Claude's presence. It's possible to argue that Peter's invisibility faded due to the psychological compulsion/fear of seeing the source of the invisibility walk away. Because this was a future timeline, it's also possible that multiple power use is something Peter doesn't gain until after a long time of training/experience. My observation for the above image is that the cup completes most of its movement before Peter even starts to become visible. And even this is debatable with any number of complicating factors such as whether the TK is used just to give the cup an initial tug and it slides to a stop due to regular friction, or whether he uses TK all the way from start to stop, etc.. --Glue 19:53, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

From the most recent Behind the Eclipse: [7]

"Shaun asks, 'Was the fact that Nathan was needed to fly Peter away just done for dramatic effect since Peter has flight, too, or does this prove Peter only has access to one power at a time?'

It’s the latter. Peter even says, 'I can’t stop it. I can’t do anything.” Peter was helpless. There were two options. Kill Peter. Or Nathan could fly him away and try to save them all. Now, if Peter or Nathan survived and how – remains to be seen.'"

So it's quite possible that scene in Five Years Gone was a mistake. I've added this to the notes. Conduit 18:05, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

• I don't think it was a mistake, I think what the writers meant was that Peter couldn't use his other powers while he was going nuclear, not that he can never use more than one power at a time. Come to think of it, when Peter and Claude have their fight with broom handles in Unexpected, they're invisible and Peter uses psychokinesis.--Pearse 18:42, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Right, I believe the writers were referring to that particular moment at Kirby Plaza, not in general. However, it is unclear in the interview, so the Notes is the best place for the info. But even if the statement were taken as you're interpreting it, I'm still not sure the scene in 5YG is a mistake. Five years is a long time to learn to control and access more than one power at a time. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:02, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
    • I agree, there are many ways for one to interpret an interview. He seemed to be talking about the moment at Kirby Plaza, nothing else. It would be extremely pathetic and disappointing if Peter could only use one power at a time.--Ice Vision 21:46, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
      • You guys might have already covered this, I might be going over old ground but I thought my two cents might come in handy - Peter was having considerable trouble controlling one highly unstable power (Ted's), it seems like all of his concentration was being used to keep this power in check, using flight would have meant abandoning this control over his radioactivity, possibly resulting in him going nuclear soon after he takes off. In the future when he uses two powers at once they are powers he has had plenty of experience with and (it looks like) he can control with minimal effort hence controlling the two powers at once is not a problem like controlling a newly acquired, highly volatile power must be. Sorry about the thesis I just love discussing Heroes theories :).
• I think that as of Kindred the limits section needs to be updated, because Peter definitely healed while pinning Will against the wall with his telekinesis. O'course, it might be a good idea to add that some powers may be/are easier to double up b/c they require less concentration and/or are automatic (i.e. the regeneration), or something. Altho, if that does get worked into the article, please phrase that better. --Spellingbee 23:43, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Empathic Mimicry and just Empathy

I just watched Genesis again some days ago and didn't think of this until now. Peter said that when his father died, he felt it. I'm thinking that empathy was the first power Peter absorbed, possibly from his father because he mentions that he felt connected to him. --User:Rockyrojas88

• Claude calls Peter an "Empath"; mimicry is just one of the effects of Empathy. --Ted C 07:20, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
  • ah, okay then thanks for clearing that up --User:Rockyrojas88
    • Didn't Angela Petrelli say Peter had a heart just like his father (in addition to the 'depression', etc)? Maybe mimicry is Peter's power and he has just had empathy the whole time from his father as a young child, making being empathic (to people in general) something of Peter's core. Just a thought. OUChevelleSS 19:13, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
      • Peter's power is empathy. It's not his father's, and I don't think Angela ever said that. Do you remember the episode?--Ice Vision 19:28, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
      • can we change the name of this power classification to genetic mimicry? empathy is the sharing of emotions, not abilities.DawnTreader
        • Peter mimics the abilities of others, but he recalls their abilities by remembering (consciously or unconsciously, as is currently the case) how they made him feel. His empathy for others allows the mimicry.--Hardvice (talk) 11:32, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
          • I tried to have it changed to just plan Power Mimicry in the past but because of the fact that Peter was called an empath (even though anyone can be considered one) and that he, in order to reuse the powers, has to remember how the person "made him feel" we decided to go with Empathic Mimicry. I agree that is should be just plain Power Mimicry because Empathy is the ability to sense others emotions and manipulate them even. Now in his current situation with no memory of the past, how is he able to use those powers when he can't even remember the people that used them orginally and how they made him feel is the only arguement I have to make.--The Empath 16:09, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
            • Well, he's still feeling the emotions, even if he isn't relating them to the people he learned the power from. Look how out of control his anger got when he mimicked telekinesis against Will.--Hardvice (talk) 16:41, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
              • And that particular situation led some to claim that he acts like the person he's mimicked the power from. So when he's using one of Sylar's powers, he's like Sylar, and so on.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  16:44, 31 October 2007 (EDT)
                • Can't we call his power Power Mimicry or possibly Empathic Power Mimicry. Empathic mimicry makes no sense according to Peter's power. In fact it doesn't make any sense at all. Hardvice, while you're right about how easily his anger gets out of control in conjunction with telekinesis and it has happened before in Unexpected in the climatic showdown over Simone and other crap between Peter and Isaac. I disagree that he becomes like the people who his is mimicing. He doesn't become like Elle when he starts throwing lightning bolts nor he acts D.L. when he phases nor acts like Claire when he regenerates. Elemental5293 21:03, 4 January 2008 (EST)

Peter's power collection

Under Limits, it states that Peter does not necessarilly have to see a power being used in order to absorb it and cites Ted's power of induced radioactivity as an example. However, the information on induced radioactivity states that he cannot consistently control his powers, particularly when agitated. I believe Peter can only pick up powers that are used in his vicinity, whether consciously (like Claude's invisibility) or naturally (like Claire's regeneration). Ted potentially covers both.

This would explain why Peter has not exhibited the powers of many of the people he has come in contact with, particularly Sylar, from whom he only seems to have gained telekinesis, which Sylar directly used on him. However, under Theories, it's indicated that creators have confirmed that Peter picked up all of Sylar's powers, but there is no citation for this. Does anyone have the link to the interview? --Nightxade 11:44, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

I was unsure about this too, but I noticed Peter has Phasing (presumably from D.L) yet he has never witnessed D.L using it. In fact, the only time I recall Peter seeing D.L (when not phasing) was when everyone was in Kirby Plaza, D.L was on the ground in pain since he had been shot by Linderman. D.L's power seems to be used consciously and he had a very high level of control on it. Peter must have copied this power just in the presence of D.L. Yet, he has shown no signs of Sylar's other powers when he is in his presence. --Dave

• And now it's even more confusing with Peter's memory loss. At first one could assume that if he didn't know about the power, he couldn't use it, such as Eden's Persuasion. With the TK, he saw Sylar use it before, so he knew it existed, and therefore, could use it. Now, with his memory loss, you can argue that he doesn't remember a thing about anyone, and therefore can't use any of his powers...the fact that he can means that not only can all the powers he's been around be used by him, but the theory that he needs to think, or 'feel', about the person to use it, is pretty much out the window. In the GN, Petrified Lightning, we see Peter thinking of Caitlin and his electromagnetism works, after a few attempts at getting it to work by itself. BUT, he used it as a instinctive defensive reaction in the cargo crate...If you weren't confused before, and now are, I'm sorry :P --Felixdakat 05:09, 2 November 2007 (EDT)

• So if Sylar consumes powers along the way like he has with Michelle's power, will Peter have that power as well or at least be able to resist it? Or is it a one time thing where the first time he met Sylar that was it, any powers at first meet is all he'll ever get. If Peter maxes out his powers at first meet he will not get the pin drop hearing or liquefaction abilities.-Dogbert 05:54, 13 November 2007 (PST)

Claude's remark under Notes

Claude says that it is "fitting for an "empath" to be a nurse". This is most likely not a reference to a previously nurse with powers reminiscent of Peter's that Claude may have known but a quip on the fact that nurses can be said to require a level of empathy on the job, an ability to relate to the patient. Claude is essentially making a pun, most likely not referring to a previous aquaintance. If noone objects to this reasoning I'll come back and delete this statement at a later date. --Marshmellis 22:47, 5 November 2007 (EST)

• IMO, b/c it's a pun on the power, it can go in the notes section. Any other opinions? --Spellingbee 23:46, 15 November 2007 (EST)
  • Agreed. Marshmellis is missing the point; it doesn't matter whether it's a pun or not. He classified Peter as an "empath", which is worth noting on a page about his power. Nurses only enter into it because, as noted, it's a job that requires empathy. However, what's important is that Claude classifies Peter (and presumably others) as empaths, which is a reference to his power.--Hardvice (talk) 23:52, 15 November 2007 (EST)
    • Given the heirarchy of name choices now clarified in the template, would it not be appropriate to just name this power "Empathy"? That's the only canon term that we have for Peter's ability. --Ted C 11:54, 19 November 2007 (EST)
      • It is also the name of an emotion, which is confusing. However, seeing as we have Freezing and Lightning, it does make sense. --SomeoneImportant 12:05, 19 November 2007 (EST)
        • What we have is "an empath", which is a canon description of the user, like what we have for "precognition", based on "precog" (except that "precognition" is also mentioned explicitly in Heroes Evolutions). When the canon source is a description, we can use that to make a canon-source name; usually, that's as easy as changing the part of speech ("fly" to "flight", "invisible" to "invisibility".) In Isaac's case, were it not for Heroes Evolutions, we probably could have opted for "precognitive painting" or the like and still been accurate, because "precog" would still describe someone with that ability. In this case, I think we may still need the "mimicry" side of things to get across that he copies powers, because "empathy" doesn't do that on its own. Someone who uses empathic mimicry would be empathic, and by extension an empath, but not all empaths would be able to mimic superpowers, which is why right now Claude's description is treated as a source for a descriptive name. I think it's fair to say that the canon description of Peter as an "empath" fits with the power "empathic mimicry" as readily as it does with "empathy", and "empathic mimicry" is less speculative because he hasn't shown any abilities traditionally encompassed by "empathy". It's also arguably not clear that a reference to Peter as an empath is a reference to his ability and not his personality, so I don't really mind that here, a description of a power is based on a canon-source statement about the wielder of the power. However, if we want to treat it identically to other names derived from descriptions like "flight", that's fine, too. Note, just to cut off any unnecessary wank, that "lightning" has nothing to with this conversation--the ability itself has been referred to as "lightning", so we're not deriving anything from a description in that case.--Hardvice (talk) 13:41, 19 November 2007 (EST)
          • Thanks for that breakdown, Hardvice. You have a way of organizing information in very clear way that flows nicely. Your organization makes a long read like the one above easy. It's important to note that in this case, Claude's comment is being used to describe the power rather than to outright name it. If anybody would like to read more discussion about it, there's this link. There's a lot more discussion on the site about the topic, but I'm not really in the mood to track it down right now. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:50, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Carbonizing the virus: Example of two powers at once

Peter uses another example of two powers at once. 1) Induced radioactivity to turn the virus into carbon, and 2) Enhanced strength to press his hands together tight enough to seal in a nuclear reaction. Otherwise, the nuclear reaction required to carbonize the virus would have also taken out several city blocks. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 12/3/2007 23:16 (EST)

• That's ... uh ... an interesting theory. Of course, since it took Niki several minutes to bash down a sturdy door, the idea of using her strength to contain a nuclear explosion is a bit ... far-fetched. I think it's safer to assume either 1) the amount of radiation used to destroy the virus was a lot less than a nuclear reaction or 2)a wizard did it.--Hardvice (talk) 00:06, 4 December 2007 (EST)
  • Well, I guess that just also proves that he used his telekinesis to supliment his enhanced strength. Joser Kyind 00:09, 4 December 2007 (EST)
    • I think we're thinking too hard.--Ice Vision 00:11, 4 December 2007 (EST)
      • Ding ding ding! There were a lot of those moments in this episode. I thought it was a great episode, provided you don't dig too deeply into a lot of things.--Hardvice (talk) 00:15, 4 December 2007 (EST)
        • Yeah, like why didn't he just phase through the door? It seemed to work well enough to get Adam and he out of the company's facility. ;) Sometimes you just need to sit back and enjoy the ride. (Admin 01:05, 4 December 2007 (EST))

BBC references "Empathic Mimicry"

Just saw BBC3 special of Heroes Volume 1 name Peter's power as Empathic Mimicry. I think someone on this site came up with that, didn't they. Anyway just wanted to say that's cool for whoever it was. --SomeoneImportant 18:23, 5 December 2007 (EST)

• It was a collaborative effort. We called it "power mimicry" until Claude's comment about "empaths", at which point it shifted to "empathic mimicry".--Hardvice (talk) 18:30, 5 December 2007 (EST)
  • They pegged Sylar's power as "He steals everyone elses". --SomeoneImportant 18:32, 5 December 2007 (EST)
• See here. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2007 (EST)

Make it Clearer

I think this page needs to make the difference between Mimicry and Empathetic Mimicry clearer. --Tesphen 17:32, 17 December 2007 (EST)

• I think it was well explained in the lead. Do you have any suggestions? --Ice Vision (talk)
  • Agree. I'm not sure what else could be added, but I'm open to ideas. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Rename?

As brought up here, we may have a cannon trump cannon situation. To quote cannon references to this power: "Peter's specific DNA allows for a blend. Like colors in a mosaic, resequencing itself to mimic the abilities of those around him."

"Like a chameleon?"

"More like a sponge. It's precisely why I've been studying him."

"Could his condition become dangerous to himself or to other people?"

"If he absorbs too much, or comes into contact with an unstable ability, then most definitely yes."

- Mohinder, Nathan (The Fix)

"A nurse who's an empath, very cute."

"Empath, what's that mean?"

"Means you're a pain in my ass, mate."

- Claude, Peter (The Fix)

This power is named, in canon, something entirely different by two separate "experts." The expert in the former conversation is an independent researcher taking up his father's research in Evolved Humans. The one in the later is a former employee of an organization that has been involved with the study and employing of Evolved Humans for over 30 years. This is similar to what we experienced with Adoptive muscle memory, but there the expertise of Mohinder outweighed the expertise of Micah.
As of now, we have a synthesis of the two names.
The question: should we (a) try to determine who trumps who in this matter to yield a canon name (b) Keep the existing non-canon name that was synthesized from two good canon names, possibly redefining canon to fit this name (c) come up with something completely different? --SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2008 (EST)

• I'm not sure what you're advocating renaming it to. The information you quoted seems to imply that the current name "empathic mimicry" is appropriate. For clarification, though, the power wasn't "named" in canon rather it was described. I'm not sure if this point is relevent, but I mention it just in case since an explicit canonical naming of the power would reasonably override descriptions taken from canon sources. When scientific research in the show explicitly names an ability (as Mohinder did with adoptive muscle memory) it's essentially a special case where they're telling us in no uncertain terms what they're calling the ability. (Admin 01:22, 4 January 2008 (EST))
  • My opinion is to leave it as-is, for reasons already stated by SacValleyDweller and Admin above.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2008 (EST)
  • Actually, Miami, I was trying to remain neutral just to broach the subject and not advocate anything in my post. Now, with thoughts more organized, I'll advocate my position(s): I think it needs to be renamed to something more accurate and/or has more look-at-the-name-and-get-the-power qualities to it. As it stands now the current name doesn't not meet these criteria. Taken literally/at face value, the name implies "Mimicry of Empathy." Layperson: "What's so great about Empathic mimicry, he can fake empathy?" Solutions: Implementing option (c) by renaming this power to "Empathic Ability Mimicry" would address both concerns, as it gives a general sense of the ability just by reading the three words and it incorporates the two descriptions better. To simplify and address only the "look-at-the-name..." concern: implement option (a) call Mohinder the better expert and rename this as "Ability Mimicry." --SacValleyDweller (talk) 02:08, 4 January 2008 (EST)
    • Check out some of the previous discussions regarding the name "empathic mimicry" on this talk page. It's already received a decent amount of discussion and since the changes don't have to do with a more canonical reference now being available the previous discussions should cover this already. "Empathic mimicry" doesn't mean "mimicry of empathy", it's an adjective describing the mimicry which, as previously discussed, is empathic in nature. (Admin 02:14, 4 January 2008 (EST))
      • Indeed, I think what SVD is thinking of would be "Empathetic mimicry" (the ability to mimic [not fake] another person's feelings about something/someone).--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:23, 4 January 2008 (EST)
    • What Admin said. "Empathic" describes the kind of mimicry, not the object of the mimicry. He mimics superpowers because of his empathic connection to others. Neither "canon source" on its own constitutes a name for his ability; both together describe it and how it works very well. This is a case where we have canon sources which describe aspects of the power, but no single canon name -- it's similar to Maya's ability in that respect. With Maya, we have a canon reference to poison and a secondary reference to emission; together, they give us "poison emission", which describes the power better than either could individually. Same thing here.--Hardvice (talk) 03:30, 4 January 2008 (EST)