This is the very heart of the buddhist doctrine. It is similiar to Aristotle's doctrine of the mean but more all-encompassing. Aristotle believed that virtue lies in between two extremes. It is bad to have too much pride, for you will attract the animosity of others and this will blind you to the shortcomings of your plans and abilities, at the sametime being too humble will cause you to be stepped on and ignored by others. So virtue lies in not being too proud or too humble. One of the buddhist's methods for teaching involves the teacher emphasizing the opposite of the students beliefs and thus bringing the student into the middleground. The Buddha himself did this. While many believe that life is pleasure (sukha), he said that life was suffering (dukha). Buddhists believe that spectrums of extremes are not straight lines however.Take light and dark for instance. If you have too much light or too much dark the end result is the same. You are unable to see. The spectrum of opposites is thus a circle and the middle of a circle is not on the circle but through it. If this is puzzling it is because true wisdom can not be imparted directly but only reached through individual reflection. Words are illusions like all other things in this impermanent reality. The path to enlightenment comes in realizing that 'opposites imply each other' as Heraclitus said. The world is pleasure, suffering, both and also neither.

I will expand on what "Socrates of Athens" said: Buddha was brought up as a prince surrounded by wealth, but he felt something was missing in his life. So, he left and led the life of an ascetic. Even though he denied himself material comforts and fasted until nearly at the point of starvation, he still hadn't found the answer to his questions. He found that neither excess nor deprivation were the path to enlightenment. Instead, he found that living a path of moderation was more helpful in his journey towards enlightenment. That is the middle way.

The Buddha said: "If you tighten a string on a musical instrument too much, it will break. But if it's too slack, it will not play." This was his metaphore for The Middle Way. For me The Middle Way means: Equanimity. Balance. Compassion. Fairness. It means caring for others as much as for yourself. Unless you're a dysfunctional caretaker type, then it's caring for yourself as much as for others. ;) It's sort of like being willing to share your seat with the “loser” in a round of Musical Chairs. In the Middle Way, there are no losers. And no winners either. Just people being compassionate with each other, and with themselves. And I'll tell you what the Middle Way is *NOT*: It is not Detachment, nor Ambivalence. Neither is it Mediocrity nor Indifference. And it is certainly not Profitable. To make a profit means to get more than than you put in. So someone, (the buyer), through ignorance or effective marketing, paid more than it was worth...and you made a profit. And they experienced a loss. This is not The Middle Way...and not "right livelihood" either. (see the Eightfold Path for "right livelihood")

In general, the Middle Way or Middle Path is the Buddhist practice of non-extremism.