How lightly can you touch on something without violating it by your touch?
Why does the modern Logician not include the ‘Subjective’ presence so integral to NamaRupa within his own definition of ‘Form’? [ The Logician’s ‘Form’ as used here is not to be conflated with ‘Logical Form’, a different and very useful concept.]
He doesn’t, because the rules of Logic say that what happens in his Mental-Space belongs to him. In fact it is him. The Logician recognizes himself, has modeled himself from just that very mix of elements that stand in counter-point to the abstraction he has defined as ‘Form’.
Mental-Space is not in his field-of-vision because it is seated behind him as part of what makes him who he is and see what he see’s. It is part of the vision, not the field. Its elements are part of his organic contact lenses and without them he will not be able to see as he see’s.
To expand on Descartes: I am Thinking, therefore I am; I am what I am now Thinking.
Logic will repeatedly trip you up for its nemesis Absurdity marks all the guideposts on the trek. And you will keep tripping on the rules of Logic until you see where the rules come from.