β
In other words, Kantβs defence of revisionary ontological monism entails at the very least the possibility of revisionary ontological pluralism. I take him to be committed to revisionary ontological monism because he thinks that the domain of appearances contains within it everything that exists, and anything that is outside the domain cannot exist, but might perhaps schmexist. However, Kantβs monism cannot make sense of this option, in particular, because it limits the concept of real possibility to the domain of existence. Thus, the other domains β schmexistence, krexistence, X-istence, and so on β are not really possible, but are maybe schmpossible, krpossible, or X-possible.
β
β