Proof That "Moderation" Is Meaningless: All Comments Welcome

  • Thread starter Thread starter rasman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers around the assertion that the phrase "in moderation" is often meaningless, with participants debating its validity. A proof presented by Erik Rasmussen argues that true moderation cannot exist without the risk of being excessively moderate. Contributors highlight the subjective nature of what constitutes moderation, emphasizing that the thresholds for "too much" or "too little" are arbitrary. The conversation ultimately critiques the phrase as a vague guideline lacking concrete application.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of philosophical concepts related to moderation and extremes.
  • Familiarity with logical reasoning and proof structures.
  • Awareness of subjective interpretations in language and meaning.
  • Basic knowledge of rhetorical devices and their implications in discourse.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research philosophical arguments against moderation in ethics.
  • Explore logical fallacies related to vague language and definitions.
  • Examine the role of subjective thresholds in behavioral psychology.
  • Investigate the implications of moderation in various contexts, such as health and lifestyle choices.
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, linguists, psychologists, and anyone interested in the nuances of language and its impact on behavior and decision-making.

rasman
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hello. I'd be curious to know what you all think about my proof that the phrase "in moderation" is so often meaningless.

How many times have you heard someone say, “Moderation in all things“, “Take everything in moderation”, or “X is fine, but in moderation”? Replace X with anything you like: food, alcohol, exercise, sleep, etc. I will now prove to you why this statement is completely meaningless.

The rest of the proof is http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/2006/08/23/moderation-proof/".

All comments welcome. Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks to me like you need to learn moderation in application of proofs. :approve:

To be truly moderate in all things you cannot be excessively moderate.
 
Seek not the golden mean, but rather the golden extreme. After all, by similar means you can prove that you can't get too much of a good thing.
 
Last edited:
rasman said:
Hello. I'd be curious to know what you all think about my proof that the phrase "in moderation" is so often meaningless.



The rest of the proof is http://www.erik-rasmussen.com/blog/2006/08/23/moderation-proof/".

All comments welcome. Cheers!
Nice proof. I do hate it when my exam grades turn out terribly high! :biggrin:

The thing, in my opinion, that makes that statement not a tautology is the decision of which things lie in the set of "so often" things, and which do not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gokul43201 said:
The thing, in my opinion, that makes that statement not a tautology is the decision of which things lie in the set of "so often" things, and which do not.
What I meant by "so often" was "almost always if not always". "Do everything in moderation" is just a phrase that means "don't stuff too much or too little", which is an idiotic thing to say, especially when the "too much" and "too little" thresholds are completely arbitrary.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
16K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
503K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K