Jump to content

Argument to moderation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2a00:23c5:e929:9e01:fdb2:917:4a3f:9258 (talk) at 19:33, 8 September 2023 (link article in a way i find more fitting). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam)—also known as false compromise, argument from middle ground, and the golden mean fallacy[1]—is the fallacy that the truth is always in the middle of two opposites.[2]

An example 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.[3]

See also

References

  1. ^ Fallacy: Middle Ground Archived 21 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine, The Nizkor Project (accessed 29 November 2012)
  2. ^ Harker, David (2015). Creating Scientific Controversies: Uncertainty and Bias in Science and Society. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-06961-9. LCCN 2015011610.
  3. ^ Gardner, Susan T. (2009). Thinking Your Way to Freedom: A Guide to Owning Your Own Practical Reasoning. Temple University Press. ISBN 978-1-59213-867-8. JSTOR j.ctt14btd4j. LCCN 2008023988.