to anyone else. Yet everyone agrees that this is not so.

As for the example drawn from language, it is not an instance of the issue under discussion. Someone who has heard only Arabic cannot speak another language or mentally formulate expressions in any other language. Thus, expressing himself in a language other than Arabic is not something he pictures in his mind, either beforehand or afterwards. Even if he knew that people had a language other than Arabic, or heard it without memorizing it, this would not enable him to express himself in it or to represent it in his mind.

Languages are comparable to the crafts and occupations a person knows, such as tailoring, carpentry, and farming. If he is proficient in them only in a particular form, then, upon seeing them, he can conceive of knowing how to practise them only in the form in which he is proficient. How, then, can the words and movements a person conceives and pictures in his mind—things he wishes and intends to carry out through his own power—be compared with things beyond his power and will? It is therefore clear that this does not fall within the matter under discussion.

The first example does resemble it, but the judgment stated concerning it does not apply without qualification. It applies only to someone who knows of no human being other than a black person and intends to address a black person. This being so, the unsoundness of the two examples he gave becomes clear.

The twenty-seventh point: It may be said: If what you have said were true of