Outer and Inner

Kant draws a distinction between 'Outer Sense' and 'Inner Sense'. By 'Outer Sense', he seems to mean the processes of sight, hearing, taste, touch, and smell. By 'Inner Sense' he seems to mean any reproduction of outer sensings, pleasure and pain, memories, thoughts, etc. Because one's own foot is an object that one can see and touch, it is an object of Outer Sense, whereas the pain of a sore ankle is in Inner Sense. In an example that he does not entertain, he seems committed to classifying one's stomach as an object of Outer Sense, perhaps because it is as visually accessible to a surgeon as it is to oneself, while a stomach ache is in Inner Sense, because no one else can feel it. Now, Kant treats Outer and Inner as realms that are ready-made, but unclarities in his analyses suggest that they are more than merely given as is. For example, is the sense-datum 'red' Outer or Inner? It would seem that it could be either, depending on whether it is referred to an outer object, or to the perceiver. And, the same ambiguity seems to hold of any datum of the 'five senses'. That the answer depends on the nature of the 'reference' involved, suggests that the entire distinction between Outer and Inner depends on it as well. In other words, 'Outer' and 'Inner' are the products of processes that can be called 'Externalization' and 'Internalization', respectively, and, hence, are thereby distinguished from one another.