Highlights From The Comments On Criticism Of Criticism Of Criticism

Companion Highlights to 'Criticism Of Criticism Of Criticism,' with substantial Scott engagement. Zvi's Criticism^4 response; the development-econ reviewer's nuanced defense (general critiques carry field-specific context that can't fit in a forum post; RCTs aren't the whole truth); an extended Einstein/Mercury-perihelion history thread (paradigm shifts driven by elegance/thought-experiments vs the evidence used to persuade others; Darwin-vs-Mendel synthesis); the pastor/God-existence analogy for what kind of criticism one is soliciting (Scott's genuinely good extended treatment — it's fine to want church-running feedback and defer the God question, if you've thought it through); and a rich evangelism discussion (the Bahai non-evangelism ideal, 'aren't you evangelizing non-evangelism,' and the mad-scientist-superplague / abolitionism thought experiments about when aggressive advocacy is warranted). Scott lands on 'some organizations are actually just good and genuinely want criticism.'

Quality 71 · Strong. Strong, top of the companion band: near-essay Scott philosophy (the criticism-solicitation and evangelism sections) plus a good paradigm-shift-history thread; held at 71 by its highlights format.

Claude’s paradigm shift 50 · Moderate. Notable: the pastor/criticism-solicitation and 'reasoning through narrative beats vs evidence' framings sharpen the parent's argument.

Real-world impact 2 · Minor. Within-discourse: shapes how readers think about soliciting/giving criticism and evangelism; no material reach.