What is the difference between metaphysical conceit and metaphysical wit? (1 Viewer)

[2KL4SKL]

What I thought it was was that wit was the use of intelligence to produce the conceit, & conceit is the result. However this booklet I have goes "It is mainly a matter of nuance. ‘Wit’ and ‘conceit’ were both aspects of a mental set, shared by writers and readers who looked for analogies and connections between things." So now I'm like whaaaaaaat?

 

[sazlik]

I'm having a bit of trouble making this distinction as well; my current understanding (which is quite possibly far from correct!) is that a conceit is a kind of 'strained' or 'far-fetched' drawn-out metaphor, whereas wit is more general--unexpected leaps of intellect. So, according to my understanding, conceits, paradoxes, and so on would all fall under the heading of 'wit'?

I keep meaning to ask my teacher about this--I think he's explained it before, but yeah, it seems to be a pretty fine line between the two.

Anybody have a better understanding than I do, and care to correct me?