No, but I think you may have the arrow of time reversed here. The argument in its essence - not that I'm reading GP's mind, nor need to, as the argument is not

No, but I think you may have the arrow of time reversed here. The argument in its essence - not that I'm reading GP's mind, nor need to, as the argument is not novel - is that, with access to general aviation as narrow and difficult as it's become in the past five or so decades, commercial pilots will still learn the technical aspects of operating a commercial flight during their airline-provided training, but rarely have much opportunity to learn how to fly, that is, to develop the intuitive understanding of aerodynamics and aircraft behavior that can enable a pilot to react correctly and without excess need for thought in situations and circumstances where that can make the difference between life and death for everyone aboard their aircraft. Whether or not I fully buy the argument, I don't suppose I know. I do know that a lifetime of reading, study, and home simulation taken together taught me less about what an airplane does when it's flying than did one fifteen-minute discovery flight in a Piper Archer. It's different for professionals than for an aviation-nerd amateur, of course. But I see no reason in principle to assume there aren't things you only really learn from spending enough time flying a plane too small and simple to lie to you, and every reason from experience to assume that there are. (Having just seen your edit, I'm no longer sure this qualifies as a response on point, but I'm going to let it stand and finish my supper.)