increased, because the combination of visible ideas hath constantly the
same name as the combination of tangible ideas wherewith it is connected:
which doth of necessity arise from the use and end of language.

50. In order therefore to treat accurately and unconfusedly of vision, we
must bear in mind that there are two sorts of objects apprehended by the
eye, the one primarily and immediately, the other secondarily and by
intervention of the former. Those of the first sort neither are, nor
appear to be, without the mind, or at any distance off; they may indeed
grow greater or smaller, more confused, or more clear, or more faint, but
they do not, cannot approach or recede from us. Whenever we say an object
is at a distance, whenever we say it draws near, or goes farther off, we
must always mean it of the latter sort, which properly belong to the
touch, and are not so truly perceived as suggested by the eye in like
manner as thoughts by the ear.

51. No sooner do we hear the words of a familiar language pronounced in
our ears, but the ideas corresponding thereto present themselves to our
minds: in the very same instant the sound and the meaning enter the
understanding: so closely are they united that it is not in our power to
keep out the one, except we exclude the other also. We even act in all
respects as if we heard the very thoughts themselves. So likewise the
secondary objects, or those which are only suggested by sight, do often
more strongly affect us, and are more regarded than the proper objects of
that sense; along with which they enter into the mind, and with which
they have a far more strict connexion, than ideas have with words. Hence
it is we find it so difficult to discriminate between the immediate and
mediate objects of sight, and are so prone to attribute to the former
what belongs only to the latter. They are, as it were, most closely
twisted, blended, and incorporated together. And the prejudice is