And, if we take to extend this comparison, still a bit further, then it is clear that the degree to which the sharp can picture can be similar to resemble the indistinct one, depends on the degree of indistinctness
of
in
the latter. For suppose you had an indistinct picture and had to
draw
sketch
a [| ]corresponding[| ] sharp picture. In the
first there
former
is an indistinct blurred red rectangle; you replace it by a sharp one. Of course – various such sha[p|r]p rectangles might be drawn which to co corresponded to the
blurred
indistinct
one. But if in the original the colours
merge
run
into one another without
a
any
trace of a boundary, then will won't it not
become
be
isn't it then a hopeless task, to draw a sharp picture corresponding to the
blurred
indistinct
one? Won't you then have to say, : “Here I might just as well draw a circle as a rectangle, or a heart shape; all the colours run into one another just anyhow.; [E|e]verything, and's correct, and nothing[,|'s] – is correct.” – And this is the position in wh[c|i]ch anyone you finds himself, for instance, yourself, if, e.g., who searches for definitions in in aesthetics or in ethics which correspond to our concepts.
      Always ask yourself, in this difficulty: “How did we learn the meaning of this word – ‘g[ut|ood]’, for instance? By what examples; in which language games? You will then see m[r|o]re easily that the word must have a family of mean[k|i]ngs.