Argument to moderation

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]

References[edit]

^ Fallacy: Middle Ground Archived 21 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine, The Nizkor Project (accessed 29 November 2012)
^ Harker, David (2015). Creating Scientific Controversies: Uncertainty and Bias in Science and Society. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-06961-9. LCCN 2015011610.
^ 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.

This logic-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[Nizkor-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.

[1]

[2]

[3]

See also[edit]

References[edit]