Lanier is fascinating to me in that his perspective seems so far askew from my own that the exercise of even trying to understand what he's saying is necessaril

Lanier is fascinating to me in that his perspective seems so far askew from my own that the exercise of even trying to understand what he's saying is necessarily broadening. Yes! Not that he's so far afield of what I might think, but sufficiently contrary to my own opinions while at the same time offering plausible reasons for his point of view. Even if I'm ultimately unpersuaded at least I've had reason to reconsider some things.