# Nagel’s “The Core of ‘Mind and Cosmos’" through an Earth Centrist lens **URL:** \ **Category:** Philosophy of Mind\ **Created:** [August 1, 2026, 6:06pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/nagel-s-the-core-of-mind-and-cosmos-through-an-earth-centrist-lens/2080 "2026-08-01T18:06:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 160
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2026, 4:00pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/nagel-s-the-core-of-mind-and-cosmos-through-an-earth-centrist-lens/2080/160 "2026-10-05T16:00:12Z")
> [@John](#): > > I cannot help seeing this notion of the self as ‘not being in the world’ as ‘self-as-container’ and of course I can see how the idea makes sense from a certain abstractive perspective To regard the self (the metaphysical subject) as a container is to objectify the self, which is the very mistake that Wittgenstein is trying to lead us out of. Others have made the same point, as I point out in [another thread](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/subject-and-object/3360/30). > [@John](#): > > I think primordially we experience ourselves as being in the world alonsgide others, both human and non-human, sentient and non-sentient. I think this is the “false starting point” (subject as just another object in the world) that Wittgenstein is trying to jolt us out of. It is also the false start that Mait Edey is calling into question in the post linked above. > [@John](#): > > Can you explain some more how you think, or think Wittgenstein thinks, that thinking of the subject as object enables the “misguided question of solipsism”? As I said above it seems to me that case that thinking of the subject as container of the world would tend more to generate the solipsistic view. As you say, “thinking of the subject as container of the world would tend more to generate the solipsistic view,” – i.e. “thinking of the subject as object” (a container) "enables the ‘misguided question of solipsism.’ ” I interpret the Wittgenstein of the TLP to be telling us that the unexamined impression that we begin with – that the subject is nothing more than an object in the world – is a logical error. Instead, there is a _metaphysical_ subject that is a _limit_ of the world. But it is not a _container_ – the world doesn’t need to be “held together” in that way. The Wittgenstein of the PI is telling us that he was wrong to think that way in the TLP. He was “bewitched by language,” and he now considers the problem to be that of a _grammatical confusion_. We mistakenly model the structure of reality on the structure of our subject-predicate form of language, so we unthinkingly concoct the idea of a metaphysical subject and confer upon it a substantial existence. But you should be wary of taking my interpretation as valid. It is likely contaminated by other views that I’ve encountered along the way. --- _[View the full topic](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/nagel-s-the-core-of-mind-and-cosmos-through-an-earth-centrist-lens/2080)._