Thomas Nagel's 'what it is like' argument establishes that the qualitative character of subjective experience is constitutively inaccessible from any third-person or intersubjective standpoint.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Constitutively inaccessible(describing how subjective experience relates to outside observation): Impossible to access or know by its very nature or definition—not just in practice, but in principle, because of what the thing fundamentally is.
Intersubjective standpoint(another way besides objective observation to try to understand experience): A shared or mutual perspective between multiple people, as opposed to one person's private inner experience.
Subjective experience(as used in philosophy of mind): What something feels like from the inside—your personal, conscious awareness of things, including emotions, thoughts, and sensations.
Third-person standpoint(contrasted with subjective, first-person experience): An outside, objective point of view—like a scientist observing someone else from the outside rather than experiencing things as that person does.
Thomas Nagel(as the philosopher being referenced): An influential American philosopher known for writing about consciousness, ethics, and how we understand ourselves. He published 'The Possibility of Altruism' in 1970 to explore whether we can be genuinely motivated to help others.
qualitative character(as used in metaphysics): The specific qualities or features that make something what it is—its color, shape, texture, and so on. Two things have the same qualitative character if they look and feel completely identical.

2 topics