Given the title of this piece, I was surprised to find yet another piece about Scott Alexander. I've read a few of his essays, but never regularly, and I wouldn

Given the title of this piece, I was surprised to find yet another piece about Scott Alexander. I've read a few of his essays, but never regularly, and I wouldn't claim to be a follower or a fan. So I'm pretty much the target audience for a takedown of his work: I know who he is, I'm not on "his team", and I try to stay open-minded. With that in mind, this article is borderline unreadable (ironic in light of the title?) and seems to be almost purely preaching to the choir. I do admit I stopped partway through, because I didn't think I'd get anything more out of it. For a takedown to be really effective, I think you've got to give your target the benefit of the doubt... then show that they're still wrong. I don't see that here. I didn't really find anything worth my time.