Nature, Extranature and the Limits of Knowledge in the Philosophy of Nature
In the Philosophy of Nature, nature and extranature do not represent two separate natures, nor two realities, but a simultaneity/dialectic of the same nature. In other words, a single nature compared, comparatively and related to different benchmarks, situations and systems of reference. Extranature is not the opposite of nature, nor a supernatural domain, but a nature viewed beyond the limits of a particular content, body, benchmark, situation or system of reference.
The nature that we experience is our immediate, conventional and relative nature, which we are and in which we exist. Extranature represents the same nature in its unlimited dimensions as limited/extralimited or unfinite as finite/infinite, unknown, known/pre-known or known/extra-known, as the case may be. From this extranature every particular nature departs and returns, without ever being exhausted by our limited experiences.
Thus, what appears as extranature for one content or body may represent the immediate nature of another content or body. Just as any benchmark may be an absolute for certain contents and bodies, yet is certainly a relative for other or different kinds of contents and bodies. Extranature is not an absolute unknown, but a relative unknown. It is not outside nature, but only outside the limits of experience and knowledge of a content or body, entity/universe or object/phenomenon, etc. Certainly, however, it is known, comprehended and defined by the contents and bodies within whose limits it exists.
Therefore, the Philosophy of Nature maintains that:
Nature and extranature are the same nature in different degrees of limitation and extralimitation.
Extranature is nature that exceeds the limits of an experience without leaving nature.
What is extranature for one entity may be nature for another entity.
Its knowledge, comprehension and definition are not absolutely separated from the chaos or agnosticism of any system or from ignorance in the classical sense, but are situated within a continuous becoming and transformation between finite and infinite, between limited and extralimited, etc.
Reality is the extranature from which the nature we experience is extrapolated and to which it permanently returns, and vice versa. If for one body extranature does not become known, for another extranature is known, and the nature of the former becomes or transforms into the extranature of the latter.
In this sense, reality, nature and extranature do not constitute distinct and incompatible domains, but different expressions of the same unlimited nature, which cannot be completely known, comprehended or defined by any finite content or body, but which can be continuously known, comprehended and become, as extrapolation or metaphor, without ever being exhausted.
Nature, Extranature and the Kantian Transcendental
Kant argues that we do not know reality directly, but through the transcendental conditions of experience. Space, time and the categories of the intellect make any human knowledge possible. Therefore, what we know is nature as it appears in our experience.
The Philosophy of Nature accepts that any experience and knowledge are limited by the conditions of their own content, body or frame of reference. In this sense, the Kantian transcendental may be interpreted as the conventional expression of the limits through which a particular nature relates to itself and to what it knows. As proof that in Kantian philosophy everything departs from or returns to God.
The difference appears when we analyze that which exceeds these limits.
For Kant, that which lies beyond possible experience, (the nature that we are and in which we exist, as long as we exist, for us and for the Philosophy of Nature) belongs to the domain of the transcendent and cannot become an object of knowledge proper.
For the Philosophy of Nature, that which exceeds experience does not represent an absolute rupture from nature, but is extranature as the reality of the same nature. Extranature is not a domain separate from nature, but nature itself in its limited/extralimited, finite/infinite and known/unknown dimensions.
Thus, the Kantian transcendental may be reinterpreted as:
the set of conditions through which a particular limited nature constitutes its experience and knowledge. Compared, comparatively or related to benchmarks, situations and systems of reference.
Within the same space/time in which extranature may be understood as:
that which permanently exceeds these conditions without ceasing to belong to nature. Compared, comparatively or related to benchmarks, situations and systems of reference.
In this interpretation, the transcendental no longer represents only the structure of human, limited knowledge, comprehension or definition, but the expression of the limits of any content or body that exists, knows, comprehends or defines nature within its own limits.
Extranature thus becomes the horizon toward which every experience tends without ever being able to exhaust it.
Therefore, the Philosophy of Nature can accept the Kantian transcendental as a description of the way in which a content or body knows, comprehends or defines the experiences of nature, considering that these limits do not separate nature in an absolute way from that which lies beyond them. These limits only delimit a particular nature as experiences of extranature beyond them and of its own experiences as extranature or extra-experiences.
From this perspective:
the transcendental describes the limited conditions of experience;
extranature describes the unlimited continuity of nature beyond those experiences and conditions;
reality represents the simultaneity/dialectic beyond nature, the experiences of it as extranature that exceeds it. Compared, comparatively or related to benchmarks, situations and systems of reference.
Thus, what in Kant appears as the limit of knowledge becomes, in the Philosophy of Nature, the starting point of extrapolation and metaphor toward a broader nature. The limit is no longer an endpoint of the knowledge, comprehension and definition of a body or content, but a relative convention within an unfinite nature (finite/infinite) and an unlimited nature (limited/extralimited), in which every content, body or entity participates simultaneously as part and whole, as nature and extranature, as finite/infinite, etc.
In relation to Kantian philosophy, the Philosophy of Nature does not accept an absolute separation, in any form, between the phenomenon and the object of any body, nor between the entity and the universe of the content. The nature of experience and the extranature beyond the experiences that exceed it form an inseparable continuity. For this reason, extranature cannot be completely identified either with the transcendental or with the Kantian transcendent.
Nevertheless, if a terminological approximation is necessary, extranature may be understood as a relative transcendent of nature and its experiences. It exceeds any particular, limited experience without being separated from it in one way or another, even though we may do so through our conventions and their limited conditions of existence. It is not an absolute transcendent, because it continues to belong to nature and can be known, comprehended or defined partially through extrapolation or metaphors, within the limits of any content or body.