5 ms·
> "The truth is somewhere in the middle." Another day, another invocation of the golden mean fallacy.
by spankibalt 1y ago
> "The truth is somewhere in the middle."
Another day, another invocation of the golden mean fallacy.
- freedomben 1y agoAnother day, another invocation of the false dichotomy fallacy. If the truth isn't somewhere in the middle, then by definition it must be on one of the two extreme edges. That's a pretty bad (and ironic) fallacy to commit, unless you think everything in this world (or at least all regulations) are binary (either perfect or completely worthless)
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> If the truth isn't somewhere in the middle, then by definition it must be on one of the two extreme edges In one dimension. If both sides are fundamentally wrong, the middle is probably also mischaracterised. Pro-and anti-phlogiston theorists [1] weren’t validated by a little phlogiston. They were superseded by oxygen theory. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory
- spankibalt 1y ago> "In one dimension." Not even in one dimension. But that is obviously also a categorization/composition issue and therefore subject to other, potentially fallacious and accordingly named, pitfalls.
- capriciotrary 1y agoI'm no electrical engineer. But I know it's crucial to not let the phlogiston out of the wires.
- spankibalt 1y ago> If the truth isn't somewhere in the middle, then by definition it must be on one of the two extreme edges. Just because accurate results aren't to be found "somewhere (unspecific!) in the middle" doesn't mean that one a) finds them precisely in the (extreme) edges, or fringes, and b) that the middle is completely excluded, especially in the analysis and comparison of dynamic systems (e. g. macroeconomic analysis).
- capriciotrary 1y agoAnother day, another infinite-dimensional Hilbert space.