Buddhism, at least some versions of this, does explain this contradition. That this desire to eliminate contradictions is, once the others are dissolved, also dissolved. It is part of the process to use this heuristic in the earlier stages. And there are many learning and training processes where heuristics in the early states are NOT good ones to use later, but trainers will suggest them early on. So this criticism does not hold.
There is truth as some timeless statement that mirrors reality. And there are instrumental truths, ones that elicit actions and processes and states. Everyone wants to start at the end. To have the end in their hands. Now I don’t like the Buddhist end, but to deal with their ideas from a very specific idea about what a truth is, is to limit the processes we can use to get somewhere. Heuristics are trying to get people to a next stage. And from that stage new things can happen. This is true for learning golf, how to play poker hands, singing techniques…whatever. Once you have reached the next platform, new rules apply and others may not.
People here, online, have so much faith in words on a screen. Or words on a page.
Learning, especially learning things like how to suffer less, are experiential processes. And words and sentences are not used in the same ways. In Zen, sometimes this is called pointing. What do the words do.
But everyone here thinks sentences are supposed to be perfect mirrors. And Buddhism is good in one way in showing that that model of truth has many problems. The map and the territory are not the same.
I dislike Buddhism because of its ideas about what parts of us we must cut out. But it is not an inconsistant system.