If experience were what it seems to be, if thoughts truly referenced what they seem to be about, if consciousness were actually intentional, etc. then you could not enquire as to the being of experience, and for the most part, in every conventional way, you cannot do so without violating 'self-ratification', in other words being guilty of a performative contradiction. And yet it seems clear that you can make this enquiry, even if only at the apparent limit of intuition, say by considering your life from before your parents were born, or otherwise from 'outside' - or 'inside'. Experience is full of holes where the unexperiencable shows through - they might seem to be minuscule, but size is meaningless in this, as are inside and outside. And what's more experience couldn't be experience if it weren't so pervasively punctured.