Nagel argues that irrespective of how sophisticated our scientific methodologies and tools become, they inevitably fall short in penetrating and comprehending the subjective realm of another creature’s conscious experience. Nagel explores further the insurmountable limitation of objective analysis when understanding subjective experiences.

At the heart of Nagel’s essay lies a thought experiment: What is it like to be a bat? The philosopher maintains that no matter how much we study the bat’s biology (such as echolocation and behavior) or employ imagination, we cannot fully comprehend a bat’s experience: “To the extent that I could look and behave like a wasp or a bat without changing my fundamental structure, my experiences would not be anything like the experiences of those animals” (439). Here Nagel invites readers to explore the chasm between understanding a bat from an external perspective and knowing what it is like subjectively to be a bat. In doing so, Nagel illustrates the gap between objectivity and subjectivity. In his essay, the bat analogy illuminates the limitations of objective analysis in the study of subjective experience.