Summary Of What Is It Like To Be A Bat By Thomas Nagel

In this paper I will explain how Nagel uses his master argument premise to defend an anti-physicalist approach that in order to experience qualia it can only be done through a subjective point of view. Furthermore, he states differences between subjective and objective points of view, adding on to this he also suggests that by attempting to move towards objectiveness one must take a step back from subjectiveness.

In his widely acclaimed book “What is it like to be a bat?” Thomas Nagel takes on a rather anti-physicalist approach by using two examples to demonstrate that physicalism cannot explain the nature of mental state-consciousness. He describes the difference between an subjective and objective point of view. To do this he provides us with two examples: How a blind martian can understand the nature of phenomena, and how a human can know everything there is to know about a bat but they will never truly know what it is like to be a bat from a subjective point of view. Similarly, piggybacking off the idea that philosophical zombies are physically living humans that are brain dead/lacking mental life, Nagel proposes a relatively similar idea. He brings down the idea that consciousness is physical: That the consciousness of a

Although Nagel does not keep a strong stance in his argument, he does well in going against physicalism, but he does do so in its entirety. He partially defends his viewpoint, not only this but also leaves the floor open for the physicalist to object at any point in time, given that no discoveries against consciousness being able to be explained through a objective point of view. I believe that Nagel purposely chose to play a smart card, thereafter suggesting this because we have not been able to reduce consciousness to purely physical characteristics as we can now in time for subjective