While it is an interesting article and I can agree with some of the arguments in it I can't help but think that in outlining the author's reasoning why reading

While it is an interesting article and I can agree with some of the arguments in it I can't help but think that in outlining the author's reasoning why reading about mental models is futile it inevitably contradicts itself (which I guess it is at least up front about, not many blog posts tell you to stop reading the blog entirely, halfway through the first section). Then again I suppose that writing a blog post on mental models that on the face of it is trivially false does end up proving the author's point. On a more serious note, while we're comparing mental 'mental model' models. My experience has been that it's more useful to think of mental models as a vantage point. A good mental model grants more perspective while bad mental models obscure things. Of course this doesn't absolve you of understanding the basic concepts, perspective won't help you if you don't know what you're looking at.