At the very root of philosophy is the seemingly irreconcilable difference between existence and experience. This fundamental divide has been grappled with since the outset of the Western philosophical tradition. Notably by Plato (Forms), and again by Descartes (dualism), and yet again by Kant (noumena and phenomena), it has even been addressed by more modern philosophers, in the early works of Husserl and Heidegger, and from there developed once more by Merleau-Ponty in Phenomenology.
However, all of these frameworks have some kind of inherent irreconcilability. For dualists, it is the arbitrary division of mind and body. For phenomenologists, it is the inescapable anthropocentric or, at least, biocentric bias that rejects an understanding of perception outside of biological systems, in fact, outright denying such a thing. This, of course, invites the question of how the mind emerges from matter?right back where we started. Owing to this, I wished to create a framework that could reconcile many of the profundities of epistemology and ontology laid out by this prior philosophical thought. That is to say, a singular theory that could reconcile the conflicts of epistemological and ontological inquiry.
This framework is meant to mend these conflicts without discarding any of the truths therein, even if these truths seemed to be in deep conflict. The conflicts are, fundamentally, regarding the essence of these two categories (ontology and epistemology). What is reality? What do we know about it? And what can we know about it? As it turns out, these questions guide us toward a solution?they gesture toward us that ontology and epistemology are deeply, and perhaps inextricably, connected?and that something about this connection implies, or perhaps even reveals to us, the ultimate domain of reality?that is to say, that things are actually happening, both in and outside of our minds.