The Truth Rarely Lies in the Middle

As a person who researches a lot of the crap I talk about (it may sounds like BS, but sometimes it isn't!), I am often flummoxed by those who take the position that the truth lies half way between the extremes:

I think that often where I am is just in the middle. The middle is often the commonsensical place to be. The notion that one side is right and one side is wrong is generally, as one finds in life, not the case.

Fortunately, Jonathan Chait offered a terrific response to this inane comment, starting with:

Roberts has a great point. The sensible position usually does lie halfway between two extremes. Just look at history. In the 1960s, the country was split between extremists who wanted to deny civil rights to African Americans, and extremists who insisted on completely equal rights everywhere. The dispute caused so much strife and anger because no sensible moderates could be found to stake out the middle ground between these equally radical positions--say, desegregating some institutions but not others, or letting black people vote in every other election.

The article makes good points, explaining why compromising for the sake of compromising is doomed to failure. Some situations require a 100% solution, not a 50% solution. Beyond that, we can often have sides where one side represents their position honestly and the flip side is totally full of shit - as often happens. What happens when a situation has more than 2 sides?

The idea that the truth is "in the middle" may work when it comes to subjective memories recalling some events when people are exaggerating but has little application elsewhere, and those that cling to it to avoid actually thinking about how to solve a problem are lazy.