The existential theme of materiality may guide our reflection to ask how things are experienced with respect to the phenomenon that is being studied. It would be difficult to overestimate the significance of “things” in our lives. The things are our world in its material thinglike reality. With almost any research topic we can ask, how are “things” experienced and how do the experiences of things and world contribute to the essential meaning of the phenomenon? In a real way, we see and recognize ourselves in the things of our world. And the things tell me who I am. How do they do this? How are things extensions of our bodies and minds? How can things be experienced as intimate or strange? A phenomenon is never really a static object but rather as Heidegger says the thinging of the thing. It is this thinging that is given in the event of the appearance of the phenomenon. Things can disappoint us or reflect our disappointment back to us. And they can remind us of our responsibilities. Some authors such as Bruno Latour (1992, 2007) and Peter-Paul Verbeek (2005, 2011) suggest that things, especially in their technics state, have agency just as human persons do. Thus, in our encounter with things, we experience the moral force they exert on and in our lives. Of course, things present themselves at different scales. Do we actually experience micro-objects at the nano-level, even if that falls outside of our immediate sensory possibilities? And how do hyper-objects form part of our experiences of phenomena that we are interested in? Hyper-objects are massive things like climate (the phenomenon of global warming) and other ecological objects of vast proportions as described by Timothy Morton (2013). We can use the term hyper-things to point to complex, difficult, and elusive aspects of “things,” such as the “atmosphere” of a city, the “horror” of a war, and the “spectacle” of a grand vista. Even immaterial things possess a certain materiality.