Apples & Oranges?

I have just finished reading a book about contrasting worship styles. In the book, six different styles are presented and then the case is responded to by those holding a differing view.

One response caught my attention this morning.

Some authors in the book make an apple and oranges argument, according to this response, whilst others contained a right or wrong slant.

He rightly observed the important difference between the methods.

In an apple/orange argument, the two options are similar and, individually, quite useful. Sure, the significant differences may result in one being a more appropriate fit for what you are trying to achieve, but either can be productive. As he says, "both can fit in the fruit salad."

Alternatively, arguments which hold one position to be correct and the other in error do not leave space for this. One is clearly better than the other. One is not only... a little different... or on the right path... but a grave mistake.

I wonder if we do this when describing alternative ministry strategies.

When we hold both up to be inspected, does our language compare apples and oranges or right and wrong?

Do we see the value of each viewpoint (in it's unique context) or do we just look to shoot it down in flames and raise our specific style on a pedestal?