I don't like the flavor of this post. It feels very much like navel-gazing and, if it wasn't for the domain name, it likely would have been lost to /newest.
Where is the knowledge here? That we don't have immediate recollection of retained information? Knowledge is based on a beginning and ending context.
For any thought there is someone who will find it obvious, it doesn't mean we should discard it, instead we should consider it in relation to the the audience. It only takes a cursory reading of the comments here to conclude that this audience found it not just novel, but helpful in forming their own ideas about knowledge - a hallmark of a worthwhile piece.
Secondly, your summary of pg post doesn't do justice to the its contents. To me it's about the distinction between mere reduction of information, akin to jpg compression, and building a model from it. A model is Turing-complete, a jpg is not. The distinction is important, in that it directs the effort required to correct misconceptions later in life.
Which makes me think of a saying. One that I remember. "Sophia Loren without a nose is not Sophia Loren". Here's another one "if my grandmother had balls she'd be my grandfather".
The point is PG wrote it so just like if anyone of note wrote it it would be more of interest than the same thought from anyone else.
After all these are analog thoughts and subjective this isn't science.
I'm also surprised people actually find the contents of this blog post insightful, but I suspect it has far more to do with who wrote the article.
I mean, is it not obvious that you can take away new ideas from reading a book multiple times at different stages of your life? As a simplified example, movies with twist endings hinge on exactly that fact -- armed with new information, events you have already experienced take on new meaning. More "important" things will have more significance, but it's the same idea.
Is it not obvious that your own world views are the result of your own experiences and others who you have contact with, even if you cannot precisely remember everything that would lead to that world view?
Where is the knowledge here? That we don't have immediate recollection of retained information? Knowledge is based on a beginning and ending context.