I respect PG very much. His past successes, YC, and his essays are great. He's not infallible though and I'm glad someone had the balls not just to put their di

I respect PG very much. His past successes, YC, and his essays are great. He's not infallible though and I'm glad someone had the balls not just to put their disagreement in writing but to post it here on HN too. The author makes some good points and if the Schlep Blindness essay was written by anyone else there wouldn't be such a knee-jerk reaction to come to his defense like there is here. This community pays a lot of lip service to being the best, the brightest, critical and independent thinkers but then we all end up looking like hypocrites in situations just like this one. While there's no doubt that PG is am exceptional person I really think his celebrity and a ton of groupthink influences our interpretation of what PG says and how we react when someone doesn't fall in line to compliment him or do anything but disagree with what he says. I also shouldn't have to litter my opinion here with qualifications about how I think PG is great but without doing so I'll probably get bullied into submission via downvotes and various snarky comments. When the author of this article pointed out that the PG essay was basically telling us what we already knew while tricking us into thinking it were so profound the lightbulb went off in my head that inspired this. Anyway, we should all take what PG says like something any mere mortal would come up with. Some of its good, some not as good. Putting him on a pedestal impedes pour ability to think critically about the content of the writing and let it pass as high quality no matter what.