There exists a divide between what one perceives and the cause of the perception. What embodies appearance is the object appearing separate from the sense-perception of it. It has itself in itself and would exist whether sensed or not sensed. There is nothing in experience which would imply, or prove, an appearance; nothing which could bring an object into the world based on one’s own sensory datum. The nature of the thing belongs solely to that thing, to itself, and cannot be separated from it. Although perceived as what it is, as made an example through experience and, hence, intuition, it is actually not what it is. The red of the house would not be the same red of the ball. Removed from the house it would vary from its “given-ness.”. Its essence remains but its physical content would be altered. Thusly, there are separate worlds of experience that are of one body, one essence, but project that which they are not. As in consciousness and self-consciousness, separated by itself from itself and culminating in being, which is through its bodily presence a “natural being of the natural world” and perceived as such.
Experience is “meaning.” It collects knowledge, understanding, reason, etc., and places it within consciousness. It is the “known” and consciousness is the “knower.” It is not a duality, but a relationship between knowing and the knower. It represents that which “is.” Without a knower to know, nothing could be known and, by contrast, without something known a knower would not exist. Experience is this knowing. It is both a starting and an ending of itself. It provides direction for being through the spatio-temporal realm while denying essences to protract into time. Essences can only be known in their immediate experience. Beyond that they fall into a “nature of experience.” It is more like a stolid pond capturing the already-past on its stagnant surface while hiding all that lies beneath and beyond its darkness.
Since all things are intentional, all thoughts and movement, changes made in and to the environment we inhabit, it is clear that reality is not, in any way, “independent” but sutures itself to being and formalizes through the attribute of multifarious events and experiences engendered by the circular composite of all consciousness’s existing in a particular time and place. The world is not absolute. Only the beings that guide it and the forces that take shape through their inevitable movements. They form the present by dissecting the past and race indubitably towards a future that has no boundaries but is in itself bounded by the limits of knowledge and understanding owned by beings-in-the-world.
Since the Ego exists in and for itself, than the implication that the world exists for the Ego is necessarily true. And, it is through its own awareness that the Ego is able to experience all experiences; to have knowledge and reason. The world is “independent” of the Ego yet wouldn’t exist if not for the Ego creating the circumstances for it to exist . Without one’s knowledge of an existent world, without the awareness of it, there would be no purpose for it, nor would it stay independent. Its realization would go unnoticed as being, through its Ego, creates its own experiences and does not need the world to separate what is and what is not. The Ego, the “personality,” the “self,” enjoys its independence through its ability to recognize essences before they form into a “reality.” Through this unnaturally natural tendency of the Ego to know itself through its own essence, to recognize its “selfhood” and its want to experience only the most blissful and ecstatic existence, albeit as being-in-the-world, is its distinctiveness and its independence from the world. Thusly, the world as independent in itself from the Ego, forms through a dependency and is the sole “proving ground” whereby the Ego retains its own freedom and its own ability to fully separate itself while being the One of the Many of the One.
If there exist other modes of knowledge beyond our own understanding, is it possible that phenomena exist in a realm completely for themselves? Can an object exist in and for itself without entering the sensual world? Can spirit be considered a thing-in-itself since it cannot be known outside itself by appearing to itself? Spirit unfolds through being by lending itself to consciousness, but this consciousness of self is just that. It cannot reach any deeper. Being blurs its truth. Therefore spirit is in-itself-for-itself-for-being. Being could not be without spirit. And spirit could not uncover itself without being. It could not appear to itself as appearances are reflections of something, and spirit is nothing if it did not have being to protract it through a consciousness of the world. Therefore, being exists solely for the consciousness of the world. Spirit exists solely for the consciousness of itself through being.
In determining what cause is behind a leap into the imagination, one must consider that self-consciousness, in its connection to experience, adheres to the knowledge gained through all experiences and becomes, for itself, its own manifold of causes determined by the universal and what has gone before it. This leap, or cause, is the “experience of experience” and links together all events and eventualities while simultaneously producing a horizon in which one is left to engage and ruminate. The fullness of the unknown, before becoming an essential experience, which all experiences are, is inherent in consciousness and is the force of causality. It is the conjunction and transformation of thoughts that produce a knowing which is universal, carrying forward into a future of further unknowns. The “imagining” is the process of seeking that which is not, in the realm of certainty of an impossible possibility.
The psychical is not a part of nature. It’s a phenomenon that is now here and not here. It cannot be measured nor does it own an essence. It lingers in the supersensible realm of the unknown and comes into play, reduces time, through a method of self-manipulation; a directness that covers it-self in the ego and proceeds to conquer, with masterful ability, the permeable and transitory sphere of the imagination. It harbors in a “truth of the untruth” and scours the desolate region of illusions while picking through scraps of the universal. Ultimately, through the onset of invisible forces which reach through the flesh, it mutates from a ghostly form balanced on the edge of a bottomless core, to a proprietor of death casting its shadow along the concrete shore and waiting for deliverance into life.
We can perceive an object as it follows from its essence. What cannot be perceived is the essence which brings forth the object. The “what-ness” of an object is its essence. However, this “what-ness” is what escapes definition. It’s what exists between-itself-in-itself. What is “real” appears within the spatiotemporal horizon, but its origin is unknown and indecipherable. Each object is an essence. Its appearance signifies its existence which is its particularity within the universal mesh. The part it plays or significance it possesses is beyond logic. It just “is.” The experience of essences comes to us through the “natural world.” In order to gain sensual proximity to the spirit-essence, one must rely on pure consciousness to withhold the world from itself and find the realm of spirit-consciousness by excluding all that is corporeal and universal.
The realm of immanent essences gives to consciousness the essential nature of all experience, lending itself in the form of a “stream” of events particularized by each experiential subject. These integral and significant changes of “fact” become presuppositions of an external nature that leads to and creates the universal reality for consciousness. Every essence that appears to the ego is never doubted as an appearance. It is the “natural” and stands alone as it is in itself, although its essence cannot be known. Only experience of that essence comes to consciousness. These experiences play out for, and through, being-in-the-world who comes to know them as the inevitable flux of events which form the essential realm within the incidental corridor.
Locating the true and its meaning to consciousness within the absolute, begins by following a path of disbelief; a path across everywhere and nowhere, pushing the particular out of mind and uncovering the immanent through the immediate apprehension of spirit. Within this immediacy, this displacement of “reality,” pure consciousness looks beyond its-self and shifts into a movement absolved of all that is particular and “natural,” into a realm of unity with the infinite where time and space are function-less and pure spirit is felt through itself. Ultimately, “natural being” must be thrown back into the universal so the self can differentiate between the purity and the particular, and its own “nature-essence” can assert its preservation within the manifold of appearances. This movement delineates for consciousness between what is pure and what is the result of the contingent character of the universe.