irony and cartesian thinking

I wonder whether Cartesian dualist thinking often prevents the proper recognition of irony, when it is present in a book, or in one's laughter?

Cartesianism, to me, is like milk where all the creamy elements have been extracted. The non-creamy (depleted) elements of the milk are placed into another jar, and labelled "Unconscious". The creamy elements are labelled "Rationality". The two aspects of the milk, whilst once whole and somewhat integrated, are no longer permitted to mix.

Literary irony, however, relies upon their mixture. One expresses delight when what was smooth and tasteless suddenly has a creamy aftertaste: "Where did that come from? It's so unexpected!"

But dualistic thinking tends to see irony as a failure to keep both aspects of milk quite separate. After all, one's apparent failure in terms of rationality itself is, in the eyes of a dualist, no laughing matter.