This makes perfect sense to me. It's about organizational culture and differing fundamental approaches. People may agree on long term goals but have fundamentally different approaches.<p>Seeing eye to eye requires concessions on both sides, but one should carefully consider whether the "other" philosophies are philosophies that one wishes to ultimately adopt. If no, then move on.<p>Don't try to stop the disc unilaterally though, regardless of how good intentions may be. The inertia is strong, you're not accustomed to the spinning and you'll probably just end up throwing up.
This problem lead to the development of General Relativity.<p>It was a bit of a problem for newtonian mechanics ( <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket_argument" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket_argument</a> ) which Einstein was able to solve: <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=qszDAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA114" rel="nofollow">https://books.google.com/books?id=qszDAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA114</a> (unfortunately I don't know how to select or copy/paste from google book; read the two paragraphs that begin "Does this permit..."
The article is describing the Coriolis Effect which is a lot easier to understand with a quick video:
<a href="https://youtu.be/dt_XJp77-mk?t=50" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/dt_XJp77-mk?t=50</a>
I find this article to be about seeking breadth of experience in order to build empathy and problem solving skills. These can make one more effective in more areas than engineering.
The article is describing "X", where X is a Javascript library, a programming language, or any somewhat difficult knowledge that requires a permanent switch of your default viewpoint.