Following a Rule and Imitation

Mimesis is a topic that is of interest to Plato and Aristotle, but to few Philosophers since.  Thus, generally unnoticed is a distinctive Logical characteristic of Imitation--than it is constituted by a combination of Identity and Difference that is indefinitely constituted.  For example, both a slavish visual reproduction, and a radical innovation, can be classified as an 'imitation' of a work of Picasso.  This variability is not a deficiency in the concept of Imitation, but is its essential characteristic.  Furthermore, Philosophers have tended to overlook that Imitation is the substratum of all interpersonal interaction, no matter how abstractly expressed.  Thus, Imitation is the substratum of an interpretation of a mathematical formula.  Accordingly, even an interpretation of a mathematical formula is inherently indeterminate as to in what respect it is identical to it and in what respect it is different.  But this inherent indeterminacy is precisely what Wittgenstein characterizes as a "paradox" of following a rule.  Likewise, the solution that he proposes is a specification of Identity that serves his purpose of proving that there can be no private language.  But he leaves unapproached any consideration of the source of the paradox--that following a rule is a special case of Imitation, and, hence, is inherently indeterminate in its Logical character.