Sometimes however the weight of a body changes & we can't account for the change at all. But we nevertheless don't say that weighing it had lost its point “because now the body really doesn't have any one weight”. Rather we say that the body had changed somehow that this was the cause of the change of weight but that hitherto we have not found this cause. That is, we shall|will go on playing the game of weighing & we try to find an explanation for the exceptional behaviour.
      We use the formal expression “the weight of a|this body” to designate something inherent in the body something which could only be ¿demolished¿ by destroying part of the body. The same body — the same weight. (And this is a grammatical proposition )
     Green.
     Supposing what in fact is the rule became the exception. Under certain peculiar circumstances indeed a body kept on weighing the same. Say iron in the presence of mercury. Must a piece of cheese on the other hand though keeping its size, calories weigh

different weights at different times unaccountably.
     

     On the one hand it seems that if there wasn't the behaviour of it.
     “So & so has excellent teeth, he never had to go to the dentist, never complained about toothache; but as toothache is a private experience we can't know whether he hasn't had terrible toothache all his life”.

     What is an assumption that e.g. ‘A has toothache’? Is it saying the words “A has toothache”? Or doesn't it consist in doing |something with these words? How does one assume such & such to be the case?