The eleventh response: You may be asked: What do you mean by a single spatial region, and what distinguishes a single spatial region from more than one? If you mean what an indivisible atom occupies, then the oneness of the spatial region cannot be established until the existence of the indivisible atom and its occupation of that region have been established. It is well known that, even if the indivisible atom actually existed, it would not be perceptible to the senses, such that one could know whether it occupies a spatial region or not. Rather, the most that can be said is that it is within the body, in a spatial region where, as we know, the atoms created there are also present. But this neither distinguishes the single spatial region from others nor provides knowledge of it. If the single spatial region you mean can neither be distinguished nor known, there can be no valid knowledge of whether something occupies it or not. For knowing that something occupies a locus presupposes a conception of that locus. If the locus is not known to be single and cannot be distinguished, then a judgment affirming or denying that something occupies it is invalid. The proof is therefore invalid.

The twelfth response: Your opponent may say to you: By a single spatial region, you must mean either what an indivisible atom occupies or something larger. If you mean the former, then it is impossible for the Lord to occupy it, as you have stated. Your opponent could then say to you: “He occupies more than one, according to this definition.”