Feel free not to respond, but I feel like taking a whack at the implicit question.
There are lots of things that I (wearing my randomly-selected-individual hat) don't understand in full detail, may even understand in a self-inconsistent manner, yet am quite comfortable discussing at length, even teaching. Just about every neuroscience discussion section I've ever led, for instance, involved at least a few "this is what we think is going on here but we could be totally wrong" caveats.
The Taoist stance is that the nature of the Tao is just another of those things. It is a necessary rather than a contingent truth that we don't fully understand it, but that doesn't stop us trying to understand it as best we can, and talking about it in order to do so.
no subject
There are lots of things that I (wearing my randomly-selected-individual hat) don't understand in full detail, may even understand in a self-inconsistent manner, yet am quite comfortable discussing at length, even teaching. Just about every neuroscience discussion section I've ever led, for instance, involved at least a few "this is what we think is going on here but we could be totally wrong" caveats.
The Taoist stance is that the nature of the Tao is just another of those things. It is a necessary rather than a contingent truth that we don't fully understand it, but that doesn't stop us trying to understand it as best we can, and talking about it in order to do so.