search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Argument to Moderation

argumentum ad temperantiam

(also known as: appeal to moderation, middle ground, false compromise, gray fallacy, golden mean fallacy, fallacy of the mean, splitting the difference)

Description: Asserting that given any two positions, there exists a compromise between them that must be correct.

Logical Form:

Person 1 says A.

Person 2 says Z.

Therefore, somewhere around M must be correct.

Example #1:

So you are saying your car is worth $20k.  I think it is worth $1, so let’s just compromise and say it is worth $10k. (Assuming the car is worth $20k)

Explanation: The price of $20k was a reasonable book value for the car, where the price of $1 was an unreasonable extreme.  The fact is the car is worth about $20k -- thinking the car is worth $1 or $1,000,000, won’t change that fact[1].

Example #2:

Ok, I am willing to grant that there might not be angels and demons really floating around Heaven or hanging out in Hell, but you must grant that there has to be at least one God.  Is that a fair compromise?

Explanation: There is no compromise when it comes to truth.  Truth is truth.  If there are angels, demons, and God, there are angels, demons, and God.  If there aren’t, there aren’t.  Compromise and splitting the difference work fine in some cases, but not in determining truth.

Exception: When the two extremes are equally distanced from the “correct” value -- and there actually is a correct, or fair, value between the two proposed values.

So you are saying your car is worth $40k.  I think it is worth $1, so let’s just compromise and say it is worth $20k. (Assuming the car is worth $20k)

Tip: If you know you are entering into a negotiation, be prepared to be low-balled, and don’t let those figures change your target figure going into the negotiation. 

References:
 
This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.


[1] Worth, in this sense, has much to do with what someone is willing to pay, but for this example, let’s just ignore that detail—otherwise I would need to come up with another example.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Reason: Books I & II

This book is based on the first five years of The Dr. Bo Show, where Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. Every chapter in the book explores a different aspect of reason by using a real-world issue or example.

Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book