> Faced with an impossible choice – a ‘koan’ as Zen Buddhists call it A koan is not an impossible choice. That's the whole point of a koan, realizing the illus

> Faced with an impossible choice – a ‘koan’ as Zen Buddhists call it A koan is not an impossible choice. That's the whole point of a koan, realizing the illusion of the impossibility. A koan highlights the inappropriateness of (written/spoken) language to describe the ineffable experiences that life is really made of. Funny thing is pretty much all written/spoken language are in a way koans. Making an analogy with formal logic, language itself is an inconsistent knowledge base, as it allows for (seemingly) opposites to be expressed simultaneously. For example the phrase: "Absolutes don't exist", is a statement that implies absolutism itself, while at the same time stating absolutes don't exist, thus it contradicts itself. However reality is not inconsistent, it can never "contradict" itself, reality just is. So our words fail us in accurately conveying what we mean. So, depending on your own interpretations and point of view, I might be completely wrong about all of this too. PS: I was expecting the article to focus more on the meaning and potential use of paradoxes, however the word is used only once in the whole text. Despite that, loved Bateson’s remarks about dualism and overcoming our fear of death.