Phenomena vs. Onta

Distinction: Phenomena vs. Onta (taonta)

Domain: Ontology

Canonical Formulation: ?

Possible Formulation: Phenomena in this context are things which "seem." Onta are things which "are." The onta of the world are the things which we take to actually exist. This is a distinction between modes of being. The distinction is between that which actually exists and that which may not actually exist, but is still comprehended by us.

Classical Challenge: Perhaps Bishop Berkeley's "Esse est percipi," or "To be is to be perceived" (Treastise Concerning The Principles of Human Knowledge, 1710) is a disproof of this distinction. Can we interpret what Berkeley says as "To be onta is to be phenomena?" How can the two be distinct if in fact they are bound? What happened to the Law Of Non-Contradiction?