The article gives the example of Deepak Chopra, then gives advice, to tell science from pseudoscience, which requires having an actual conversation with the person. For someone like Deepak Chopra, this isn’t actionable, as the information is being pushed out one way, it’s not a dialog (typically).

In person, this can be useful, but I’ve found it’s often met with anger when people are asked clarifying questions they don’t have the answers for. Anger is a common tool employed to hide ignorance.

The concept doesn’t seem too dissimilar from the Socratic method.