The Middle of the Road

I've always been of the opinion that reality is rarely, if ever, found at the extremes. I have been reading William G. Dever's book Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? In his introduction, Dever writes:

A word about methodology may be helpful, with particular reference to my task here - that of using archaeological evidence as a "control" (not "proof") in rereading the biblical texts. I would argue that there are at least five basic approaches to doing so, in a continuum from the right to the left. One can

1. Assume that the biblical test is literally true, and ignore all external evidence as irrelevant.
2. Hold that the biblical text is probably true, but seek external corroboration.
3. Approach the text, as well as the external data, with no preconceptions. Single out the "convergences" of the two lines of evidence, and remain skeptical about the rest.
4. Contend that nothing in the biblical text is true, unless proven by external data.
5. Reject the text and any other data, since the Bible cannot be true.

In the following, I shall resolutely hold to the middle ground - that is to Approach 3 - because I think that truth is most likely to be found there.

This position is often held in contempt as the easy way out or waffling. But note that it requires more work, while constantly guarding against one of the most human of all tendencies; shoving data into existing mental pigeon-holes rather than letting the data speak for itself. Also note that the extremes (1. and 5.) involve the least work of all. Is extremism just a symptom of mental laziness?

Anyway, I'm about two-thirds the way through the book and am enjoying it thoroughly.