If I can speak about ‘what is seen’, why shouldn't anyone else speak about it?— But I have a feeling that only I can; if I assume that others also speak about what normally I should call my visual image there seems to me to be something

wrong with this assumption.
     If ‘what I see’ has nothing to do with a particular person why should I feel that there's something wrong in assuming that anybody might talk about it i.e. mean it when he speaks? Then of course I can't tell them what I see nor they me what they see any more than I can tell myself what I see.
     But they could make <…> as to what might happen in future in our visual field.
     In the normal game I say : “I don't know what they see, — but in the game I'm considering they would as much know what I see as my hand can write down what my mouth can say.
     And their different conjecture would be like conjectures made by myself at different times.
     Can my mouth tell my hand what I see in order that my hand should be able to write it down?