To gain some idea of the degree to which all realities originate, are sustained and ultimately dissolve within the open-ended and plural public space, for which the best term might be the noösphere, it is not enough to analyse any collection of the phenomena you have come to know about, since you came upon them precisely because they had some acreage in this very noösphere, and came to be there by way of certain deliberate actions, themselves narratable within this same sphere, endlessly. People will speak of their experiences, not only at length, even if just to insist that they are unspeakable - and here 'unspeakabie' is only a sort of reflexive descriptor, playing off an imputed notion of the totality of what can be spoken. No, you need to consider the ontology of your own most private thoughts and sensations. The Wittgensteinian argument against private language ought really to be an argument against private experience. But it is not merely that every experience needs a form, and all the forms at your disposal are given to you. Actually, not all experiences have form, but those that don't are all the more generic experiences, and hence deeply collective. In the innermost regions of yourself, consciousness expands into impersonality and becomes everyone's experience.