I think in a way you are correct, Henri, (may a god not curse me for saying so) but there is a metaphysic and a meta-logic to Tao ( the real Tao, not the so-called Tao) that looks very much like a denial of duality: something is true and not true at the same time. It is very much like the distinction between freewill and predestination. If there is an omnipotent God, both must be true, but if one is true, how can the other be true?
Or, from an evolutionary theoretician's point of view, how can we have freewill, when we are just an accumulation of chemical reactions? Would not the distinction between morality and immorality, between freewill and socio-biological determinism become just like the sort of metaphysical questions that the (auto-)positivists found irrelevant and nonsensical, but for the vast majority of humanity (even Lao Tzu) are utterly essential even if the answers are only able to be alluded to.
'Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination.' -Max Planck