"If I try to make clear to someone by characteristic examples the use of a word like 'wish', it is quite likely that the other will adduce as an objection to the examples I offered another one that suggests a different type of use. My answer then is that the new example may be useful in discussion, but isn't an objection to my examples. For I didn't want to say that those examples gave the essence of that one calls 'wishing'. At most they present different essences which are all signified by this word because of certain inter-relationships. The error is to suppose that we wanted the examples to illustrate that this essence hadn't yet been correctly grasped. That is, as if our aim were to give a theory of wishing, which would have to explain every single case of wishing." Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Grammar)
I'll just order what he's having, but can I substitute an order of 'art' for the 'wish' please?
The arts, at least for now, have many, rather than one function. They have many, rather than one value as well and are motivated by many rather than a single perspective.
We are discussing some of these, some aspects of this.
It is, in fact possible, is it not, that this multiplicity of viewpoints is one of the most characteristic features and beneficial aspects of the arts as a whole within human societies today?
"Again, we cannot achieve any greater generality in philosophy than in what we can say...Here too (as in mathematics) we leave everything as it is." (Ibid.)