is it possible for phenomena not to have a noumena?
(the only one I can think of is something that is attributed as the cause of reality itself - somehow a white object doesn't cut the mustard ...)
I don't believe in noumena. By definition they are inobservable . You believe in them, so please say what evidence you have for their existence. You have been asked this question several times. When are you going to provide an answer ?
see above
If you want to argue that something phenomenal is the final last word in something and any further discussion is perverse, it certainly seems absurd
All you are saying is that I must accept that noumena exist, that is, discuss things on the basis of what you believe to be the case. I will do so when you provide evidence that noumena exist.
no - its because I consider it necessary to remind you that plato is appreciated for his contribution to logic (as opposed to empirical observation)
Plato initiated the first wave of rejection of the theogeny - he did this by philosophizing on the nature of the "chos" ("void") which is attributed as the cause of the greek pantheon.
A few radical philosophers like Xenophanes of Colophon were already beginning to label the poets' tales as blasphemous lies in the 6th century BC; Xenophanes had complained that Homer and Hesiod attributed to the gods "all that is shameful and disgraceful among men; they steal, commit adultery, and deceive one another".[67] This line of thought found its most sweeping expression in Plato's Republic and Laws. Plato created his own allegorical myths (such as the vision of Er in the Republic), attacked the traditional tales of the gods' tricks, thefts and adulteries as immoral, and objected to their central role in literature.[6] Plato's criticism (he called the myths "old wives' chatter")[68] was the first serious challenge to the Homeric mythological tradition.[65]
wiki
You have chosen the above from wiki to refute my statement that Plato was a pantheist. Did you read it before posting it ?
Plato is not denying the gods; on the contrary he is defending them. What he is objecting to are the tales put about by the likes of Homer and Hesiod, which show the gods in a bad light. Leda was said to have been raped by Zeus in the form of a swan. Zeus was accused of being a liar because he sent a false dream to Agamemmnon., and so on. It is stories such as these which Plato is referring to in the passages you have quoted. "Old wives chatter" refers to myths surrounding the gods. You have totally misunderstood what you have posted.
Plato begins The Republic by telling us that he has just been down to Piraeus to worship " the goddess". He assumes his readers will know he is referring to Bendis, a Thracian goddess. Bendis was similar in form and function to the Greek goddess Artemis.
In "The Laws" there is abundant evidence that Plato was a pantheist. He believed the heavenly bodies were gods and that their regular motions betokened intelligence. He also believed they had divine souls. Collectively, he referred to them as visible gods in contradistinction to other gods , such as Zeus.
He also believed that souls, equipped with knowledge, enter the body at birth, a notion I imagine you subscribe to. He deliberately used myths because they were not susceptible of reasoned proof. Does this ring any bells ?
and lo and behold this is the point I wished to illustrate with the analogy
well the janitor cannot inquire empirically - why?
because he has neglected the prescriptive requirements for inquiry
thus sense perception is not the final authority since the senses only become potent when empowered by knowledge (and "knowledge", per se, is not an empirical phenomema)
I have indicated that noumena play an integral role in discerning objective reality - if you can't approach something noumenal, you have no claim to objectivity. If you can't understand that empiricism is fundamentally incapable of discerning objective truths, any further discussion cannot proceed
