Our confusion could be described in this
wa
y: Quite in accordance with our usual
form of expression we think of the fact which we wish for as of a
thing which is not yet here, and to which, therefore, I cannot
point. Now in order to understand the grammar of our
expression “object of our wish” let's
just consider the answer which we give to the question:
“What is the object of your wish?”
The answer to this question of course is “I
wish that so-and-so should happen”. Now
what would the answer be if we went on asking:
“And what is the object of this
wish?” It could only consist in a
repetition of our previous expression of the wish, or else in
a translation into some other form of expression. We
might, e.g., state what we wished in other
words or illustrate it by a picture, etc.,
etc. Now when we are under the impression
that what we call the object of our wish is, as it were, a man who
has not yet entered our room, and therefore can't yet be
seen, we imagine that any explanation of what it is we wish is only
the next best thing to that explanation which would show
the
actual fact, ‒ ‒ ‒ which, we are afraid, can't yet
be
62.
shown as it has
not yet entered. ‒ ‒ ‒ It is as though I said to some
one “I am expecting Mr.
Smith”, and he asked me “Who is
Mr. Smith?”, and I
answered, “I can't show him to you now, as
he isn't there. All I can show you is a picture
of him”. It then seems as though I could never
entirely explain what I wished until it had actually
happened. But of course this is not the case.
The truth is that I needn't be able to give a better
explanation of what I wished after the wish was fulfilled than
before; for I might perfectly well have shown
Mr. Smith to my friend, and have shown
him what “coming in” means, and have shown him
what my room is, before Mr. Smith came
into my room.