2

How do you describe someone who is always in the middle? For example, One person is always angry and another really calm and this person is both at times. Or they are shy and outgoing. Like science and art. Basically, they don't fit in a description cause they're always in the middle cause they do both or are both. Does this make sense?

closed as unclear what you're asking by Hot Licks, Jim, Helmar, Scott, Mazura Oct 6 '16 at 7:20

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • I think that you need to be more specific. You are asking us to cover all the bases. – Mick Oct 6 '16 at 0:55
  • They are not extreme in any sense (though you couldn't really use the term 'a moderate' here). – Edwin Ashworth Oct 6 '16 at 0:59
  • 1
    You're confusing us. Do you mean someone who vacillates between extremes, or someone who is generally positioned in the middle, between extremes? – Hot Licks Oct 6 '16 at 1:06
  • Someone generally between extremes. – Treerose61 Oct 6 '16 at 1:30
  • Middle of the road, perhaps. It depends on the context. – Mick Oct 6 '16 at 2:25
1

Perhaps, that person is balanced.

ODO:

balanced ADJECTIVE

1.3 (of a person or state of mind) having no emotion too strong or too weak; stable.

‘a balanced personality’

1

You could also use middle-of-the-road (Collins defintion):

adjective

  1. not extreme, esp in political views; moderate

Or level-headed (Collins definition):

adjective

  1. even-tempered, balanced, and reliable; steady

If you want to emphasize the fact that "they don't fit a description" as you put it, you could also consider unremarkable, although that's not exactly what you are looking for.

0

This was historically seen as a desirable characteristic, the idea that everything in moderation would be good. As such, it was referred to as the golden mean.

The desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency.
For example, in the Aristotelian view, courage is a virtue, but if taken to excess would manifest as recklessness, and, in deficiency, cowardice.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.