Kant’s philosophy stated that the world is divided into two parts. The phenomenal world and the noumenal world.
The phenomenal world is the world we experience through our five senses. This is the world created by human perception.
The noumenal world is the world outside of perception. The objective reality. The way the world really is. He believed that all around us there is a field of energy. This energy is formless and looks nothing like the world experienced by human beings.
The problem I find is that for something to exist, it must be experienced or perceived by some being. I only exist, because I have an experience of myself and others have an experience of me. If neither occurred, I would not exist in the human perception of the world.
If we go even further and say no being has the ability to experience me, including myself, then I do not exist any perception of the world. Therefore, I would then cease to exist.
I am in some way objective. I cannot be perceived by any being but still, in some way exist in an objective reality. We then have to ask the question, what does it mean to exist?
Everything that exists in the human world, exists because it is experienced. Therefore using that logic, for objective reality to exist it must be experienced by some being otherwise it would not exist in any perception of the world.
But this a paradox because if objective reality is experienced, it is no longer objective, it becomes subjective reality.
The problem is that there is no way of proving whether this objective reality exists, because the mere act of experiencing this world would make it subjective as the world would be perceived through some kind of filtration of the senses. So if no being can ever experience the objective reality, does it really exist?