The failure to recognize the interspace [the space of interaction between us and the world] as a third, irreducible domain is what underlies the dichotomous question, ontological or psychological? The distinction here is in fact threefold.
Recognizing this is extremely important for another crucial issue—if I can introduce a digression here: that of understanding the human past. Our attitude in the modern world toward earlier societies who saw themselves as living in an enchanted universe, where animals have souls, and sacred spaces emanate power, is generally one of dismissive condescension. These poor people were just deluded, projecting all sorts of wild features onto a dead, neutral universe. Once we grasp the independent status of the interspace, we can see that this condescension is misplaced.
We [may] not be ready to accept these earlier world views as literal truths, but we can now recognize them as earlier attempts to grapple with issues that we are not that good at dealing with, the more so in that many of us want to deny that they exist. From the standpoint of this discussion, we should rather be examining these earlier outlooks for insights which we could translate into our own terms. We badly need a lesson in humility.