Principle of balance (as dialectic) as sometimes, bad.

Uh. Ahem. First a few apologies to those who were...well, those who had an awkward reaction to my last post. Dunno what got into me to write that. But yeah, had to write it eventually.



Well, anyway. I've always been hearing the principle of balance. Don't know what it is? Well, as the saying goes: "In everything, balance."



So parsimonious, no? That's why its very appealing.



It holds true, in some cases. Extremes are sometimes bad. Yet, sometimes extremes can hold true, and holding "balance" as your guiding principle can get you stuck in the middle. Er...yeah.



Thus, the middle ground is not always the right ground.



Balance can be said to be the brother (if not the equal) to Hegelian (or Fictean, according to Wiki) dialectics, wherein two propositions: thesis and antitheses, point-counterpoint are clashed together and out comes synthesis. Voila. You got your truth.



So perhaps the controversy of Ghosts vs. No Ghosts exist can be solved by...ghosts exist, but can never be found in this world? Heh.



Sometimes "balance" can't always be the filter that determines the truth. Sometimes you gotta do your own investigating. The dirty work, they say.



I don't mind. =)