#argument to moderation

[anarchonist]

So frustrated atm how the political right can have massive misinformation campaigns paid for by the Koch bros or whoever, then point to a single leftist blogger who said something that could be construed as problematic out of context and shout "see? both sides". And the icing on the cake are the ignorant centrists who believe them.

[randomshoes]

What is the Golden Mean Fallacy? You keep talking about it

It’s a pretty well-known idea. Here’s wikipedia on the subject, and here’s TVtropes’ take.

In a nutshell: The Golden Mean Fallacy (also called argument to moderation) is the fallacious assumption that the correct or most reasonable belief is the one exactly halfway between the two “sides” of an issue. For example, the halfway point between feminists and sexists, between SJWs and Nazis, between the left and the right. 

There are a lot of people whose immediate response to two groups arguing is to assume that the right answer is in the middle and that each group represents one “extreme.” I think this instinct comes from what we’re taught to do to solve inter-personal conflicts as children, but it doesn’t apply to the adult world and it really doesn’t apply to moral or political arguments. (It often doesn’t even apply to children, and may be one of the reasons a lot of bullies don’t get punished. “Oh, he called you a faggot and threw you into the wall? Eh, I bet both sides have a point.”)

The two main logical problems with this fallacy are:

1) The two loudest groups do not necessarily represent the most extreme beliefs that exist.

Just because two groups are opposed doesn’t make them automatically two extremes. Hillary Clinton was (is) opposed to Donald Trump, but that doesn’t make her the extreme left. By the standards of the rest of the country, she represents the center. By the standards of some European countries she would be the center right. It all depends on context and what’s considered to be allowable in “reasonable public discourse” at the moment. (See The Overton Window for more on this.)

2) Something being halfway between two extremes does not inherently make it right.

Let’s say Person A says “We should kill all the Jews” and Person B says “We should not kill any Jews.” The middle ground between those two things would be something like “We should kill SOME Jews.” But obviously that is not any kind of reasonable or moral solution. In some cases, one side is just obviously right. In other cases, the right answer may exist to the left or right of both sides, or outside of the discussion entirely. That doesn’t mean the answer CAN’T be directly in the middle, but simply being in the middle doesn’t make it right.

I hope that helps as a run down. It’s one of the most common responses I’ve see to Trump vs. people who hate Trump. People often use this fallacy to write off or ignore both sides, and as a result a lot of GMF people will end up at the conclusion that they should do nothing, which can be very dangerous (see above completely made up example involving Jews and the murder thereof). I think it’s something everyone needs to understand. I cannot stress enough how important it is.

[bryanharryrombough]

All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.

― Douglas Adams

[meta-plastic]

There's a specific version of the middle ground fallacy that I might call the "let's hear them out!" fallacy.

What happens is:

Group E holds extremist views, and gets banned or ostracized in many discussion venues for them.

Group or person R prides themselves on listening to all comers rationally and evaluating statements at face value with minimal bias, including statements made by group E. So far so good, right?

Here's where the problem comes in: having seen that they are received uncommonly civilly by R, more and more members of group E visit R to share their opinions, instead of going elsewhere. R, instinctively trying to take the average of the views they are presented with, is suddenly having their curve skewed by excessive input from group E. The previous middle ground is crowded out by a viewpoint closer to that of group E.

If you think I am talking about a particular person or community, I very well might be, because I'm thinking of several! (Less Wrong, Reddit, and more than one small-potatoes blog moderation policy, including the way I used to handle my Livejournal, come to mind. I freely admit that my understanding of the pitfalls comes from having fallen in that hole.) More to the point, I'm analyzing a general trend that I've witnessed repeatedly. Do with this as you will.

[home-decor-design]

New Post has been published on Sitazine.com

New Post has been published on http://www.sitazine.com/office-designs/home-office-designs/home-offices-ideal-plans-setting/

Home Offices: Ideal Plans for Setting Up

You have a lot of decisions to make in setting up your home offices, it’s best to make as many of them before you start any construction.

Setting up home office inspiration models

Some of the decisions depend solely on your personal preferences – for example: the color of the room and the window treatment. I can’t help you with these except to advise you to make the room as comfortable and cheerful as you can and leave space for personal items. Family photos on your desk and artwork on the wall can make a space much more pleasant to work in home offices.

Some of your decisions will be based on kind of work you plan to do in the home offices.

For example, if you are highly computerized, you will have to make room for all your computer equipment. Your budget will also influence your decisions, bet remember that it is better to start with few high quality items and add to them later, then to outfit your entire home offices with things you will have to replace very soon.

Before you start compromising make a wish list. Write down everything you would like to have in your ideal home offices. After you decided what you want think about the limiting factors that are keeping you from building the ideal home offices. Then you can start making adjustments to your wish list. You may be surprised how close you can get with a little compromise and a common sense.

You will find that it is a treat to plan home offices tailor made just for you, one that reflects your style and personality, caters to your work equipments, and dovetails with your other commitments. Pamper yourself with at least one luxury item, whether it is a leather chair or an espresso machine. And don’t rush your decisions – you may be living with the results for a long time. Enjoy the process; setting up home offices is an exciting challenge.

Home Offices