Striving for the perfect middle ground sounds appealing, but the Doctrine of the Mean can feel a bit like walking a tightrope without a safety net. One common critique lies in its vagueness: “What exactly counts as the mean?” Modern readers often find Confucius’s guidance abstract, with no clear map for daily choices. That ambiguity can leave even the most well-intentioned person spinning their wheels.

Another sticking point is elitism. In ancient China, only scholars and the privileged could afford the luxury of leisurely moral reflection. Today’s hustle culture—where side gigs and 24/7 connectivity reign supreme—offers little time for quiet balance. The doctrine risks becoming an ivory-tower ideal rather than a practical toolkit for teachers, gig workers, or single parents juggling multiple roles.

Critics also warn that an overemphasis on harmony can stifle necessary conflict. When systems—corporate hierarchies or social inequalities—are kept “balanced,” voices demanding change may get hushed under the guise of preserving order. Recent debates around workplace equity show that sometimes disruption is the truest path to a healthier mean.

From a psychological angle, endlessly chasing moderation might undermine passion. Positive psychology (as spotlighted in the World Mental Health Day talks of 2024) highlights how flow states often require diving headfirst into challenges, not easing off the throttle. A bit of zeal, after all, spices up life—and creativity often blooms at the extremes.

Finally, cultural context matters. The Doctrine of the Mean grew from Confucian family-centric values; it doesn’t always translate to individualistic or digital societies where identity expression and rapid change rule the day. While apps like Calm invoke balance through guided mindfulness, they signal how global audiences adapt—or sometimes stretch—Confucian wisdom to fit a wildly different world.