Final answer:
Adler's techniques are considered paradoxical as they use interventions conflicting with expected approaches to highlight issues and inspire change, much like philosophical paradoxes such as Zeno's, or scientific ones like the twin paradox in physics.
Step-by-step explanation:
Adler's techniques may be considered paradoxical because they often involve using interventions that seem to contradict the expected approach or desired outcome, akin to some of the classic philosophical paradoxes addressed in the history of thought. For example, initiating an action or suggesting a behavior that opposes the client's expectation can highlight underlying issues and encourage change in a similar fashion to how the Paradoxes of Zeno raise fundamental questions about motion and time.
Similarly, in Daoism, paradoxical language is used to break conventional ways of thinking, which is another aspect of Adler's paradoxical interventions—they challenge individuals to think differently and thereby inspire change. Lastly, just as the twin paradox in physics presents a scenario that defies common sense but is explainable with a deeper understanding of relativity, Adler's paradoxical methods require a deeper understanding of human behavior and psychology to appreciate how they can be beneficial.