Appeal to moderation is less stupid than it looks
For the simple reason that moderation is so fucking hard
Appeal to moderation is logical fallacy — in which it is assumed that the truth must surely lie in the middle, between two opposites
It’s fallacious in that the truth doesn’t always lie in the middle
Sometimes the single side is completely correct and the other side is completely wrong
Often it’s so
Cognitive biases and logical fallacies however all exist for a reason
It’s because many of them are great heuristics
ESPECIALLY for the simple world, common-sense world
But many are still decent common-sense guidelines for modernity
Appealing to moderation is a decent heuristic
When you yourself are not either side of the conflict, you often have the correct common sense of building from the common ground
You look for agreement
And there where there is no agreement, you look for the middle ground
Since you’re not invested in either side, since your unbiased — you are more likely to judge each side on it’s merit
And when neither side fully convinces you — you look to cobble together a middle ground that would reconcile the conflict
It’s also of course a USEFUL heuristic
In a world of limited possibilities — like that of our ancestors — we HAD to come to an agreement — to survive
Survival is often synergistic
Productivity is synergistic
It’s better — meaning more practical — to compromise on one’s beliefs — in favour of facilitating cooperation
Of course this heuristic becomes very poor when TRUTH matters — hence why it becomes a fallacy
There’s no middle ground to be achieved with flat-earthers. It’s an utterly pointless exercise
HOWEVER,
The world is not this dichotomy of either PRACTICAL CONCERNS — or ABSOLUTE TRUTHS
Practical concerns — like finding middle ground for the purpose of reaching common goals
Absolute truths — like scientific facts or logical axioms
There’s a whole realm in between the two
Where there’s a lot of messy uncertainty, information asymmetry, varied degrees of probability
And where there’s nevertheless DECISIONS to be made
It’s when I would also defend appeal to moderation
We lack that moderation
We lack it in our beliefs
We lack it in our politics
The moment to become dogmatic is when the well has truly been exhausted, and there is absolutely nothing more to contribute
E.G. HARD TRUTHS
It can even be a subjective truth — if you don’t believe there’s any way of contributing to it — then of course be dogmatic and shut your ear to meaningless voices
BUT,
Most things in this world are not dogmatic,
Most things in this world are not certain, obviously
THEREFORE I would be a little bit more biased in favour of MODERATION
Because the opposite: the PARTISANSHIP, the mental-bubble — become SO seductive
And guess what: the latter is also bolstered by it’s own large number of massive cognitive biases and logical fallacies:
-Confirmation bias
-In-group bias
-Bandwagon effect
-Argumentum ad populum
-False consensus effect
-Echo chamber effect
-and more
Let’s find some moderation when it calls for it
You’re not so smart
Learn from others