A basic framework for reality

I generally agree with the Kantian concepts of noumena and phenomena. That is there are things-in-themselves (noumena), but we are only able to apprehend certain properties via our senses (phenomena). There is a rough correlation here between what we would typically call objective (the thing in itself) and the subjective (what a viewer is able to experience of that thing).

I personally believe that noumena deals with objects and must therefor have some phenomenal
expression Thus, I would not include the mind, the soul, rational thought, love, or God in the noumena box. However, some people would do so as they believe the concept noumena is nothing more than a bucket for all “objects of inquiry,” regardless if any perception is possible or not. Granted. I’ll concede that my definition might be too narrow, and maybe even flat out wrong. In the scope of this discussion, the distinction is not critical.

Now, some people dismiss the concept of the noumenal as irrelevant altogether since, as Nietzsche held, it is of an indeterminate nature. However, if this is true, something like, say, will-to-power, is of
an indeterminate nature (that is, completely relativistic drivel), since it is not anything that lends itself
to conclusive phenomenal expression. In fact, all philosophy and thought is nothing more than bearingless chaos, if the only criteria for validity is that which offers itself to our senses and empirical scrutiny.

No, we might not all be able to agree on that which is hidden from our senses, but this is a point I would like to return to later. For the time being, let’s accept that noumena at least exist (or if you prefer, let’s accept for the sake of argument that they do, indeterminate nature or not).

The point I would like to establish is this: noumena and phenomena are not the same thing. By any definition, they are different, though they might (and I argue must) have connection to each other.

The thing I think people overlook, however, is that they do share one essential quality: existence.
They both exist and so in one sense, they cannot be entirely different. Though the noumenal exists unto itself, and the phenomenal exists on the field of our minds, both exist. So what I would like to try and define, even though abstractly and loosely, is the encompassing sphere of existence.

This I call, total data. That is, everything in all of reality; everything in every realized dimension; everything that has had existence at any point in the entirety of time. Whether noumenal, phenomenal, or otherwise, everything is placed within this definition. Essentially by total data, I mean everything. Everything that exists shares the common property of existence – existence equals total data.

tags: noumenon, phenomenon, philosophy, science