I think many people who subscribe to Taoism pushing the idea to extremes, like thinking that only feeling is correct (in the name of the Tao cannot be spoken), or researching is useless (in the name of wu wei). As RationalWiki puts it: "separate out the ideas they find most palatable, and discard the rest as superstition"*. Even the Zhuangzi ridicules Confucius to the point that I feel disrespected and unacceptable. I also think that the reason the Tao cannot be spoken is because we have the tip of the tongue phenomenon, which can be explained by modern cognitive psychology.
What I'm looking for is a name for half-baked understanding of a philosophy. It makes sense on the surface, but it pushes the ideas to the extremes that can be dangerous if you don't study it carefully. It's like how Osho is perceived in Buddhism SE: "he's like the Tibetan saying, honey on a razor blade, if you are careful there's honey to be tasted, but if you are careless there's the razor blade." I guess the same critic can be apply to New Age.
I think this line of thinking is aligning with naïve cynicism (everyone is bias except me) and naïve realism (who doesn't agree with me are irrational, or misinformed) in social psychology and philosophy of mind, and therefore there is a name for it. Do you know what it is?
*The context in there is about the distinction between philosophical Taoism and religious Taoism, so in a sense I take it out of context.