He graduated with "some of the highest grades" in his class.

How is that at all relevant to what I am saying. The author explicitly said that it wasn't.

> Often blaming "esoteric" and "irrelevant" subjects such as linear algebra for their lack of success, while not understanding that it is a vital course for any engineer.

The author was successful in his particular environment. It was only much later he understood that the content of his education wasn't valuable in itself.

He is not blaming linear algebra, rather complaining that he was graded on memorisation rather than understanding.

And? How is that relevant at all to anything I or the author said?

His success, as the author makes explicit, has nothing to do with his university education.

The argument you started off making was that his "lack of success" was because he didn't have the desire to learn and thus wasted the opportunity.

But - he achieved some of the highest grades, so by all accounts he was successful in his education.

Much later, he understood that the contents of his education lacked intrinsic value and the only effective value it offered him was an opened "toll gate".