Clearly there are limits to the uses of skepticism.?

But the issue is tricky. Imagine that you enter a big-city taxicab and the moment you get settled in, the driver begins a harangue about the supposed iniquities and inferiority's of another ethnic group. Is your best course to keep quiet, bearing in mind that silence conveys ent? Or is it your moral responsibility to argue with him, to express outrage, even to leave the cab because you know that every silent ent will encourage him next time? Likewise, if we offer too much silent ent about mysticism and superstition, even when it seems to be doing a little good, we abet a general climate in which skepticism is considered impolite, science tiresome, and rigorous thinking somehow stuffy and inappropriate. Figuring out a prudent balance takes wisdom. Your thoughts?