I just showed you an example of where “centre” as commonly defined is not between left and right, but opposed by both…
I guess the point is, I think those definitions are deficient, and using them as a guide to understanding what is good or true is probably a flawed methodology. It’s kind of reminiscent of Fox News’ old “fair and balanced” slogan (which never was, but also just missed the point of what journalism is supposed to be about, which is truth).
Tell you what, you define right and left, I will define the center of it if that will help you wrap your brain around it. Otherwise I have no idea what it is you are trying to accomplish other than starting a zero sum fight so unless you get it together I’m out.
If the center, right, and left change over time how do you expect me to define “center” beyond that which is situated between left and right?
I just showed you an example of where “centre” as commonly defined is not between left and right, but opposed by both…
I guess the point is, I think those definitions are deficient, and using them as a guide to understanding what is good or true is probably a flawed methodology. It’s kind of reminiscent of Fox News’ old “fair and balanced” slogan (which never was, but also just missed the point of what journalism is supposed to be about, which is truth).
The plural of anecdote is not data.
If your hypothesis is “all swans are white”, and I show you a black swan, do you reject your hypothesis?
Tell you what, you define right and left, I will define the center of it if that will help you wrap your brain around it. Otherwise I have no idea what it is you are trying to accomplish other than starting a zero sum fight so unless you get it together I’m out.