IMHO the writer is setting up simplistic strawmen to knock down, without going into nuances. For e.g., why conflate 'getting things done' with 'producing bad co

IMHO the writer is setting up simplistic strawmen to knock down, without going into nuances. For e.g., why conflate 'getting things done' with 'producing bad code'? Also, in the paragraph about a 'good teacher', he protests that that this wouldn't matter if they were ignorant. Maybe he could do a better job of conveying the exact context, but I would contend that 'good' implies 'knowledgeable' for a teacher. I've had plenty of teachers who were knowledgeable, but couldn't teach/communicate for nuts. p.s: I might be a bit defensive here, as I honestly consider myself of the 'dumb but gets things done' ilk.