No of course not, will rewrite a different manner .
Maybe the formally defined relation ship between philosophy and psychology would be a better starting point.
Psychology is a spin off from metaphysics, where ontology best represents the logic of the psyche, in which logic of the psyche. Is mirrored, as an analysand.
Take the parts into which we have treated the psyche, the parts in the ages of metaphysical quandary, at which philosophical inquiry manifests the modern aspects of the philosophy of mind, and existentialism becomes the most particular stage where this literally and figuratively becomes an inquiry into existentialism.
Pjenomenology, formally embedded in existence as the relationship between Husserl and Sartre, becomes manifest.
Philosophical existentialism particulates from reduction, of phenomenon, the psychological automaton or equivalence here is regression into broader generalization, or, participation into larger and larger bounded associations of what is understood to belong categorically.
When most broadly, and formally understood, it becomes a matter through preception, manifested by qualities, such as philosophers have defined them before psychology such as extension.
Starting there, in terms of what came to be known as regression, at the level of reduction of the phenomena.( Psychological regression corresponding to philosophical reduction)
At the reduced epoche the undifferentiated or the more transcendental level, symbolism is more literal , logical and determined. The same with the more psychologic. notionless understandable interpretion in terms of more abstract representation, where abstraction can be visualized in its aesthetic sense.
Abstract art , some claim is hard to understand, as it looses its being, since it is a form of more inclusive generalization. Primitive art retreats into what Levi Strauss defines as saturated within a ‘participatuon mystique’ where more perception is embedded within common sense, understood in its mos telementary mode, of relying on larger participants to determine meaning through wider participatory experience.
The history of philosophy is mirrored similarity, and the critical philosophy embedded in Kant"s critiques, try to sow this up completely, this progressive development of differentiation, albeit unsuccessfully the moderns, in particular, the positive linguists claim, this is because there is absolute limits of what language can contain and convey. The mode by which such manifests, is through similitude and not identity.
Just stopping here, to point to the idea that positivists would deny Your claim toward the identity, to solve problems in the existence of ‘i’ , since the phenomenon , Yours and mine are reducible to the larger, more communal you and I, inasmuch as our Being, is more similar then different from each other.
The thing is, this reduced difference plays a confusing part between my and your experience .
So near to this process, lays exactly what You are concerned about in reducing Your experience more toward down to earth, but as it reduces particular content, it becomes less accessible in terms of manifesting association, relevant to Your and my being.
At this level the praxis and the practice is stalemate and this becomes a basic epoche where there really is no possible exit.
This is where we are, in an existential paradox, embedded between a mystique and a logical linguistic impass,where from, signification becomes a mode of using signs and signals, for identifying movement through time , or, subconsciously manifested interpretations becoming signs of how we at first perceive then think about construct reality.
As reality becomes less transcendable, and transcendent the points of connectibility, the association between points that can be filled , become more rarefied, and observed, before they can begin to be understood. So more and more beginning points need to be presumed, and approach the lower levels of quantum thinking, where the points=particles can no longer be observed, or per received, they become probable existences, similar to a participation mystique, where reliance on established routes need to be assumed as existence , on most probable functions.(re. Levi Strauss)
In art, pointillism requires the viewer to adhere to an aesthetic distance, to be literally connect dots, to enable an interpretation of meaning to evolve.
All said, hopefully, making more ‘sense’ ok how something manifest more than nothing, becomesmorehands on tangible in this mode of presentation.
Nothingness is assumed to subsist in the lowest realms of cognition, and travel back through reasonable reflection, through re - experience, unavailable, except through psychic break through artificial means, such as psychedelics, which break adopted means of recognition, and through reformulations of adopted patterns.
Nothingness is nothing~but such a state of Being.