text:  However as Mr Bailey further remarks that "although Berkeley's doctrine about visible figures being neither plane not solid is thus consistent with his assertion that they are internal feelings it is in itself contradictory "[34] we shall contribute a few remarks to show that while on the one hand the negation of extension is not required to vindicate the consistency of Berkeley's assertion that visible objects are internal feelings neither on the other hand is there any contradiction in Berkeley's holding that objects are not seen either as planes or as solids and are yet apprehended as extended