Ordinary language is all right.
One could divide humanity into two classes:
those who master a metaphor, and those who hold by a formula.
Those with a bent for both are too few, they do not comprise a class.
A counterpart for 5.62's 'language which alone I understand': 'that language which we alone understand'.
'… to speak about the will in so far as it is the subject of ethical attributes': so, to really communicate the purest joys, the most personal sufferings (the most personal dimension of them), in their heights or depths?
Grown-ass folks are never too good for simple things.
'… and we no longer recognize, or take an interest in, the difference between things and beings (the difference!)' (CR 468): say (when not a fantasy), as in art, when confronting a character on the page, a figure on the screen?
An intermittent internet-era delusion: The feeling that your choice of topics, of words, your intentions alone in writing something, might be enough to tag specific readers so they know to pay attention.
A young wife teaches her stepson how to text a girl.