Mit zahlreichen Alumnae*i

 

 

The approximate in the exact does not determine a rule in the conformal. So if the exact remains approximate, 

which corresponds to the rule, it comes so close to the exact that it is so
approximately exact that it may correspond to the rule which is capable of being exactly
approximately exact. Exact. Thus, what corresponds to the inexact is just as exact as the
approximate. Which in turn comes so close to the exact approximate that it now almost conforms
to the rule. In the sense of the exact approximate. Painted, designed, this in turn corresponds
exactly to what was meant approximately. But in order not to come close to the exact, let alone the
approximate, it can, according to the rule, just as well be reversed. Thus the inverse conclusion of
the inferential inversion is, strictly speaking, approximate. Which, according to the rule, may be
exactly approximate. This in turn corresponds exactly to the approximate accuracy which,
according to the rule, must be invariably approximate, almost.
In fact, it is so approximate that it becomes and remains exact. So the same.
This then leads to the fact that we are all in the same boat, which means roughly exactly the same
as described earlier. Yes. In the end, this is not a defect of not wanting to be understood, but a
result that can be recognized in the expression of the work as approximately exactly the same.
Precisely. Approximately. A3.