Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam)—also known as the false compromise, argument from middle ground, fallacy of gray, middle ground fallacy, or golden mean fallacy[1]—is the fallacy that the truth is always in the middle of two opposites.[2] It does not necessarily suggest that an argument for the middle solution or for a compromise is always fallacious, but rather applies primarily in cases where such a position is ill-informed, unfeasible, or impossible, or where an argument is incorrectly made that a position is correct simply because it is in the middle.[3][4]
An example of an argument to moderation would be considering two statements about the colour of the sky on Earth during the day – one claiming, correctly, that the sky is blue, and another claiming that it is yellow – and incorrectly concluding that the sky is the intermediate colour, green.[5]
See also
- Centrism – Political orientation
- Dialectic – Discursive method of arriving at the truth by way of reasoned contradiction and argumentation
- False balance – Media bias on opposing viewpoints
- Horseshoe theory – Alleged similarity of the far-left and far-right
- Overton window – Range of ideas tolerated in public discourse
- Ratchet effect – Restrained ability of human process reversal
- Straw man – Form of incorrect argument and informal fallacy
- View from nowhere – Principle in journalism
- Wisdom of the crowd – Collective perception of a group of people
- Paradox of tolerance – Logical paradox in decision-making theory
References
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
