I came across a reference to an Argument to Moderation that makes the point that the middle ground between truth and falsehood represents merely another type of falsehood. I'm looking for critiques and context regarding of the Argument for Moderation.
Soviet propaganda is used as an example, and the linked wiki also points out that the middle ground between Liberty and Slavery is a moral fallacy, but it seems to me this is the system we live under: partial freedom constrained by the need to earn wages in order to maintain an acceptable standard of living.
You can see moderation in the evolution of the a certain American conservative position on climate change as a series of middle grounds:
- Climate change is not happening.
- Climate change may be happening, but it it certainly not anthropogenic.
- Anthropogenic factors are contributors, but we must be cautious in policy decisions.
Presumably, you'll eventually get to a place where this position recognizes a need for policy on the matter, per the idea that: "[People] and nations do act wisely when they have exhausted all the other possibilities.”
In essence, flipping from one extreme to the opposite is disruptive and never seems to end well, where gradual, moderating steps, while an imperfect solution, do at least have the effect of creating a middle ground that may be workable.