An essay on "moderation vs. extremism"

Hello,

Could you please take a look at another my essay or at any of its parts
at your choice? Any comments and suggestions are welcome.

Topic:

"'Moderation in all things' is ill-considered advice. Rather, one should say,

'Moderation in most things,' since many areas of human concern require
or at least profit from intense focus."

Essay:

Among all the variety of concerns in human lives, some may allow moderate approach to them, while others require making radical decisions. So, as the topic suggested, the quotation "moderation in all things" should be reformulated in a way to signify an importance of moderation not in all things but in only some. To support this opinion should be adduced several cases, all require extreme approaches.

The first and the most weighty example of moderation unacceptability is curing some serious diseases like cancer or gangrene. In fighting with such an evil you cannot choose a moderate approach and cure it only partially, since it will not give permanent effect. A temporary advance of patient's condition is possible, but after a short while the patient will die. Of course, there are some cases when it is impossible to completely heal a diseased person, while it is possible to alleviate his or her pains. In such cases, a non-extreme approach to the treatment may be not only possible, but also recommended, despite the fact that the patient is already doomed.

The second example of a concern where a moderate approach is non-desirable is studying. If a person decided to study, then this person should do his or her best at it. It is not mandatory as in the example with curing serious diseases, but it is highly recommended by a bunch of reasons. First and foremost, at the moment, in every corner of the world concurrence in any professional sphere is immense, probably, as a result of fast civilization development and technological progress in particular. So, in order to occupy a decent place in the society, to get a decent job and clear perspectives for the future, a person should be highly educated. Another reason, though not so loud as previous but also significant, is that in many countries education is paid and usually costs quite a sum. It makes no sense to pay such sums and to perform at half-strength.

The third example of a concern in which a moderate approach is not the best choice is a fight against terrorism. It is impossible to solve a particular problem with a particular group of terrorists only half. It makes no sense to achieve via negotiation that terrorists do only partially what they intended to do. And that is why many countries stick to the opinion that any negotiation or haggling with terrorists is unacceptable.

As a precis, it may be concluded that moderation is everything is rather an extreme position. The examples stated above demonstrate that in some cases moderation is absolutely unacceptable, while in some other cases moderation is possible or even recommended.

---

Thanks in advance.

--

Victor