I am reading Moore's Proof of an External World. It is an established truth that you have to read philosophical papers especially carefully and try, as much as it is possible, to recover just that meaning from the readings that an author has implied there.
This is especially a difficult task for a non-native English speaker, when reading the literature in English, in the original language of a text. A difficulty I have stumbled upon concerns Moore's use of the following two phrases in a passage of the paper: in my mind and with my mind. Here is the passage itself from the paper:
It should, I think, be noted, first of all, that the use of the word 'mind', which is being adopted when it is said that any bodily pains which I feel are 'in my mind', is one which is not quite in accordance with any usage common in ordinary speech, although we are very familiar with it in philosophy. Nobody, I think, would say that bodily pains which I feel are 'in my mind', unless he was also prepared to say that it is with my mind that I feel bodily pains; and to say this latter is, I think, not quite in accordance with common non-philosophic usage. It is natural enough to say that it is with my mind that I remember, and think, and imagine, and feel mental pains - e.g., disappointment, but not, I think, quite so natural to say that it is with my mind that I feel bodily pains, e.g., a severe headache; and perhaps even less natural to say that it is with my mind that I see and hear and smell and taste.
Then, Moore continues with presenting the philosophical usage within which these different sorts of experience do not differ anymore with respect to the use of (something is) with my mind --namely, of any of them it could be now properly said that they are 'equally' with my mind-- but I think this citation provides you with sufficient context for distinguishing between the meanings in my mind and with my mind as it is used by Moore.
More specifically, the difficulty I have been experiencing comes from the usage of with my mind, for I do not understand its meaning as clearly as that of in my mind.
My opinion, I have gained from my reading(s), is that (1) Moore uses the phrases almost interchangeably, and that (2) there, with my mind supports the meaning according to which, what is with my mind presents my mind's features as long as the what is still being with my mind; or in other words, with my mind in this context supports the meaning my mind has certain features, it is furnished or determined by certain features, in the sense that these (certain) features are with my mind.
Is this interpretation of with my mind (2) and the one of its relation to in my mind (1) correct and supported by the citation?
