I think that quote makes a great point about mediocrity - the area between right and wrong, that gray area of good enough to not be wrong but not good enough to be right. It's often easier to have a mediocre idea approved by others (clients as well as an internal team) than the "right" idea, the one that is really progressive.

Pauli's "not even wrong" was about a conclusion that was (probably) well reasoned, but it started from rubbish, so was a waste of time. Telling right from wrong? [Correct from incorrect]. By testing of course, but testing needs questions to be well posed, and capable of being answered. Well posed means the situations under test are well understood (and already known), but they still have uncertainty. Another way (common path) is to learn from experience (without deliberate testing). This path has a dangerous bias, because it's based on where people were prepared to go (which sometimes worked out well, and sometimes didn't). The right answer may depend on seldom asked questions. Without testing, you can't bust myths... Tom.