Hasn't this been thought already by Kant, whose insight in the Transcendental Analytic put forward in his Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787) concerns precisely the difference between the thing-in-itself and the objects of sense perception, the
noumena and the phenomena?
This is simply a prelude to an amiable over-all description of the four-fold Suchness of Reality and its self-qualified primal
noumena, which is not attributable to simple, eidetically unqualified "bi-dimensional" entities (whose common qualification is solely based on "this" and "other", "yes" and "no", or at most "yes and/or no").
How does this differ from Voltaire's deistic watchmaker or Kant's imagined denizen of the inaccessible
noumena? How could such a God act in the world in ways traditionally attributed to the biblical God, hearing prayers and consoling hearts and even working miracles?
This Tlonian principal is in keeping with Macedonio's "fantasismo esencial del mundo" (Museo 85), which negates the existence of any
noumena independent of human ideas, apperception or imagination.
German philosopher Immanuel Kant distinguished between
noumena, meaning things in themselves irrespective of thought, understanding, space, or time, and phenomena, meaning things as they are observed and as they appear to us.
James voices as philosophy my own embarrassed, internal objection to philosophy: that we can't live as though objects were just shadows of ideal forms, or phenomena echoing some remote and unknowable
noumena, or disembodied sensations animated by God's ideas.
The challenge here is more problematic than the division of the world into
noumena and phenomena.
Repeatedly, she speaks of writing as waking hallucination, of fiction as a species of magic, of a fiction informed not just by the quotidian and pressures of physical experience but by dreams, reverie, philosophy, and intuition: all the
noumena that form the shimmer of our minds at their meeting place with the world.
The defense of Church documentation and approval, along with the polemics against philosophical skepticism, reveal more about Varghese's motivation than what he calls the "
noumena" and "phenomena" of Marian apparitions.
Guevara considers Henry Allison's claim that the distinction between
noumena and phenomena is only epistemic, and as such implies no ontological commitments to an unknowable world of things-in-themselves numerically distinct from the objects of our ordinary experience.
Thus, Kant made a formal and fundamental distinction between phenomena (the objects of experience) and
noumena (things-in- themselves).
Gass's interpretation of the much-debated Rilkean Angels is as good as any: The Angels are what the poet would be if he could free himself from human distraction, if he could be indifferent to the point of divinity, absorbed in himself like [sic] all
noumena are, and at one with the work and the world of the work, its radiant perfections.
For one thing, his theory implie the contradiction that the category of causality is inapplicable to the
noumena causes of phenomena.
