Thanks Simon for the Nagel paper. I enjoyed rereading it. It must be 10 years or so since you first recommended it to me.
I like Nagel. He seems very open-minded to me. Not at all dogmatic - at least in 1978 he wasn't. He might be now.
He makes an big issue of the distinction between subjective and objective and queries whether we can ever achieve an objective description of consciousness - i.e. one that is independent of our subjective experience.
He gives as an example the experience of sound.
The subjective experience is what we hear. The objective description is sound waves in the air i.e. propagated energy disturbances that can be understood and observed by any observer even one without the sense of sound.
However that can be stood on its head. Suppose there is an observer that can directly sense (see?) the energy disturbances. That is their subjective experience. Their objective explanation may be that it is caused by mysterious sounds that cannot be directly observed.
