//If light cannot exist without dark and positivity without negativity, then neither can be superior because both are inexorably linked and cannot function solely.//

Yes but this is not what I am saying. Wrong parallelism. Read again what i wrote.

//But positive and negative consideration, in moderation, can be important in helping us understand our situations, motivations, intentions, and perhaps even true desires. Without some measure of positivity we can end up in feedback loops where we're stuck in self-fulfilling prophecies.//

What we call negative thinking is nothing more than the default assumption in regards to how the environment works. From there on we all have a positive outcome in mind. There are no great mental efforts to balance positive and negative. That is a false narrative.

//I think the balance or middle ground is misunderstood. It's not that the truth must lie somewhere in the middle, it's that certain subjects have no clear answers and yet exist on a spectrum with extremes and the truth could lie somewhere in the middle. I've always felt this way about religion, and that equally, no religion could also be true.//

The whole middle ground thing is false in almost everything. Life is shades of grays AND colours. Also some things like religion is not about gray averages. Whether a god or not exists— well evidence shows so far that it doesn't. Taking 5 religions and averaging down the "truth" that a "a god exists" is false. It is the same as asking randomly 100 people in the street what they think about nuclear fusion and then basing your knowledge on that average knowledge. It cannot and does not apply.

//Also, not a big fan of millennials eh?//

I am not really attacking them. I only used them to demonstrate the narrative. We know is true. They know is true as well.