Eliezer stated his point more precisely in the original post:
As a general principle, on any problem for which you know that a particular unrandomized algorithm is unusually stupid—so that a randomized algorithm seems wiser—you should be able to use the same knowledge to produce a superior derandomized algorithm.
I’d recommend engaging with that formulation of his point, rather than with Silas’s summary (which is what you’ve quoted).
Eliezer stated his point more precisely in the original post:
I’d recommend engaging with that formulation of his point, rather than with Silas’s summary (which is what you’ve quoted).