Within the depth-psychology and philosophical corpus of the Seba library, ‘moderation’ occupies a contested axis between two ancient therapeutic ideals: the Peripatetic doctrine of metriopatheia — the tempering, not eradication, of the passions — and the Stoic-inflected aspiration toward apatheia, freedom from disruptive emotion altogether. Sorabji’s extensive treatment in ‘Emotion and Peace of Mind’ charts how this tension migrated from Aristotle through Cicero, Seneca, and Augustine into Christian moral psychology, with the Stoics dismissing moderated emotion as merely ‘moderate vice’ (modum vitio), while Peripatetics and later patristic writers such as Basil of Caesarea held that moderation and eradication suited different persons and contexts. The Theognidean corpus, as examined by Sullivan, grounds moderation in archaic Greek ethical life — ‘mid-course is best’ — connecting it to the acquisition of aretê and the avoidance of excessive zeal. The Icarus myth, mobilised by Dayton, translates the same principle into depth-psychological terms of self-regulation and the peril of inflation. In addiction studies, moderation appears as a clinical controversy — Marlatt’s Moderation Management versus abstinence models — testing whether self-governance over compulsive behaviour is achievable or illusory. Across these registers, moderation functions as a normative ideal perpetually under pressure from both the ideal of complete self-mastery and the reality of psychic compulsion.