No, professionals should not strive for "balance". They should strive for reason based on evidence. And when the evidence changes, their conclusions should chan

No, professionals should not strive for "balance". They should strive for reason based on evidence. And when the evidence changes, their conclusions should change accordingly. If some people say the Earth is flat and others say it's round, I don't want my geologist to say, "opinions differ on the shape of the planet". Many influential people claimed that easy money after the 2008 collapse would cause massive devaluation of the dollar and sky high inflation and interest rates. Krugman's models and historical evidence suggested that, contrary to popular opinion, inflation and interest rates would actually stay very low for many years, and that the dollar would maintain its value. Six years later, the results are in. Look at the evidence and challenge your model, or you're just spouting baseless ideology. If you'd invested with Krugman, the guy with a model who showed his work, you'd have made a lot of money. If you'd invested with the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, and the others who have an ideology without a model, you'd have lost a lot of money. Go with the evidence.