I saw a commentary on education - I think on HN actually - where the writer was suggesting that the prime directive for each student should be 'know thyself'. A

I saw a commentary on education - I think on HN actually - where the writer was suggesting that the prime directive for each student should be 'know thyself'. Advertisers know me in a shallow way only, and they aren't really served by knowing me in a deep way - they need to know me well enough to know if I might buy a given product, the why of that is immaterial to them (and they have no direct access to it anyway). There is an ideal world where everyone spends a lot of time getting to know themselves on an intimate level and then broadcasts their very personal desires to an advertising industrial complex, which finds the solutions to these deep and difficult-to-articulate drives. But the advertiser can't realistically get that kind of information on anyone. I know that's not what advertisers claim, but I'm confident in calling bullshit on what they say about knowing their customers. They can't even tell when they're irritating someone to the point of installing an adblock, and they're supposed to know what self-actualization looks like to each of their many customers? I ain't even renting that. I agree with the basic premise that advertising can be a force for good. But the advertisee has to be an active participant, else the advertiser will reliably determine that the target's telos is 'maximize shareholder value for <advertiser>'.