The fuzzy solution to dualism

Given a choice, if the process to resolve it takes more than constant time C to resolve, just "randomly" pick an answer since it doesn't really matter which to pick.

This obviously works for things in daily life. (We can probably formulate many hypotheses on why spending longer is worse.)

The question is whether this works for more serious stuff, eg. legal disputes, political debates, etc.

----------

The complement to this fuzzy approach is to precisely carve out the pieces that we are relatively sure is correct. In every bitter dispute about general ideology, there is on every side an extreme that the other side can agree to. Start from there and carve out pieces until it doesn't work any more. In those actual areas of dispute, just apply the fuzzy solution.

That might actually work well enough for many things.

(The obvious problem is that once you move away from the extreme-extreme, the extremists from the other side start disagreeing. So can we conclude that battles are fought on the ideological "frontlines" because game theorists rather have support from with extremists on "their side" instead of doing the reasonable thing?)