BARBELL & LOGIC: A logical error in dealing with the notion of “average” is to think that, in a conflict in which we are outsiders, the middle ground is likely to be right, instead of considering that each side has a 50% probability of being 100% right, and the middle ground is the least likely to be correct.
We make such mistakes in intellectual life but not in naturalistic settings. When you tell people that a woman has 50% percent probability of being pregnant, (50% of being not pregnant) but 0% probability of being half-pregnant, they get it. Replace “pregnant” with “right” and see that you are likely to make the error.
This leads many to avoid barbells by having only “moderate” risks or “moderate” opinions.
The only time I got angry with Robert Shiller was when, in 2006, he said that I was “sort of” right (about the risks in the system) but was too extreme and needed “moderation”. Actually philosophers know about fallacy in the “argument to moderation”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
via BARBELL & LOGIC: A logical error in dealing with… – Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
This is elementary: flip a coin its either heads or tails, fifty percent probably on each side at the first moment. So the outcome is at either pole both in space and in time antithetical.