Logical Fallacy of the Day!

Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct.^[21]

Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam) — also known as [argument from] middle ground, false compromise, gray fallacy and the golden mean fallacy^[1] — is an informal fallacy which asserts that the truth can be found as a compromise between two opposite positions. This fallacy's opposite is the false dilemma.

Vladimir Bukovsky points out that the middle ground between the Big Lie of Soviet propaganda and the truth is a lie, and one should not be looking for a middle ground between disinformation and information.^[2] According to him, people from the Western pluralistic civilization are more prone to this fallacy because they are used to resolving problems by making compromises and accepting alternative interpretations, unlike Russians who are looking for the absolute truth.

An individual operating within the false compromise fallacy believes that the positions being considered represent extremes of a continuum of opinions, and that such extremes are always wrong, and the middle ground is always correct.^[1] This is not always the case. Sometimes only X or Y is acceptable, with no middle ground possible. Additionally, the middle ground fallacy can create the rather illogical situation that the middle ground reached in the previous compromise now becomes the new extreme in the continuum of opinions; all one must do is present yet another, radically opposed position, and the middle-ground compromise will be forced closer to that position. In politics, this is part of the basis behind Overton window theory……(The Overton window is the range of ideas the public will accept. According to the theory, an idea's political viability depends mainly on whether it falls within that window rather than on politicians' individual preferences.^[1] It is named for its originator, Joseph P. Overton (1960–2003),^[2] a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.^[3] At any given moment, the "window" includes a range of policies considered politically acceptable in the current climate of public opinion, which a politician can recommend without being considered too extreme to gain or keep public office.)

Taxonomy of Logical Fallacies

· Formal Fallacies -A formal fallacy is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument's form.^[1]All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs.

· Informal Fallacies are Informal fallacies – arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws and usually require examination of the argument's content.^[12]

My List

Anecdotal fallacy

Appeal to probability

Appeal to Stone (Argumentum ad lapidem)

Argument from ignorance

Argument from silence

Argument from repetition

Base rate fallacy

Conjunction fallacy

Unwarranted assumption fallacy