Wittgenstein’s so-called ‘Rule Following Paradox’ doesn’t exist. The paradox is that in narrowly defined contexts the behaviors involved in following distinct rules are indistinguishable. According to Wittgenstein, this entails that whether a given person following this as opposed to that rule is a function not of a his mental state but of the social context.
Wittgenstein holds this because he has an absurdly constricted conception of what counts as a mental state, believing that the mental comprises little behind a few itches and tickles and other sensations. Wittgenstein also fails to take into account that in a world of zombies, such as he believes human beings to be, there are no social contexts.
Finally, given any two rules, the behaviors involved in following them are utterly distinguishable except, as previously indicated, artificially circumscribed contexts—and usually even then.
There is no paradox here, and therefore nothing to solve, all of this by a by-product of Wittgenstein’s philosophical impotence, and consequent omni-denialism, along with the slavish and totally bogus cult of personality that he was accorded because of his position.