Yeah, it's as if they're saying the like to be anchored and that unencumbered inquiry is bad. That means that there could be many things left unexamined because they might go against current morality, etc. That does not seem to be free thinking. Definitely philosophy would not be able to advance, if they abided by Slate's principles.

Obviously Slate can do as they wish, but to paint the other as inferior because they have a different outlook seems petty.

But, for a moment, what if all inquiry before 1970 (or go back to 1870) abided by "morality, fundamental policy, etc." we would not be where we are today.