The Epistemological Hand

"Here is one hand"— Wittgenstein asserted; for how do we know if something of "hand" truly existed only after receiving the letter or hearing the words? For whose "hand" it belongs to? If we were to entertain epistemology without the necessity of descending into radical skepticism— of which is an exact replica of pure nihilism— it is of absolute to inquire of what "hand" is being discussed or mentioned about, and of its own existence.

Then to verify, whose "hand" is being talked about? The "hand" of the cat?— for as I think "know" that we— all species— have an identical anatomical structure but of varies only in bodily designs. Then, "what" is the hand? The invisible "hand" of capitalist structure— or the invisible "hand" of said leviathan? Indeed, it is of certainty to identify which "hand" and what kind of "hand" is it; does the "hand" still even exist? For it is of our lack of knowledge and certainty that if the "hand" of the writer is truly of his own or to be someone else's. Or, can we even be consider a "hand" even if it is of different kind of condition? Per se, is it still a hand even of differences of skin colors— a "black" person's hand, a "white" person's hand— or between a dead person and alive person— a "dead" hand, and an "alive" hand— for even it is undeniable that precedes or procedes something of it is a describing word that adds something to the "hand". Then, is it originally a hand without any additional description?

Also, what is a hand? Supposedly, if our mind were to be a blank piece of paper, and I suddenly pointed and named the bottle of water (assuming that we or you have not acquisited the certainty of it) as a book— it is of "natural" principle to adhere to such assertions; undoubtedly, for gossips and rumors existed and plagued the minds of countless individuals— this is of no difference to calling a bottle of water as a book.

Then, if by means of madness, if his "own" "hands" were to be replaced by someone else's— this is, amputating one's own and attaching of someone else's hand, can we even consider of certainty that it is still his "own" for his natural "own" hands were to be amputated and disposed? Is it worthy to consider him of two combined individuals for the donator's hand were to be of his "own"?

Then, what is a hand?