You don’t get to call someone an undiscriminating skeptic if they’re prepared to publically challenge any skeptical tribal belief. The post on undiscriminating skepticism is actually pretty specific; characterizing it as “skepticism I don’t like” makes it sound like you haven’t read it.
I was talking, as I noted explicitly, about the hazards of the use of the phrase or phrases very like it. (That’s the bit where I went “The problem is that phrases like that …” “So the use of such a phrase …”) The people Zachary points at the post are, after all, going to start reading at the title, and not immediately read it in the detail you read Eliezer’s post in, or the detail you don’t seem to have read my comment in.
You don’t get to call someone an undiscriminating skeptic if they’re prepared to publically challenge any skeptical tribal belief. The post on undiscriminating skepticism is actually pretty specific; characterizing it as “skepticism I don’t like” makes it sound like you haven’t read it.
I was talking, as I noted explicitly, about the hazards of the use of the phrase or phrases very like it. (That’s the bit where I went “The problem is that phrases like that …” “So the use of such a phrase …”) The people Zachary points at the post are, after all, going to start reading at the title, and not immediately read it in the detail you read Eliezer’s post in, or the detail you don’t seem to have read my comment in.