> "X is an necessary person" is not a logical argument for "what X is doing is necessary". Seems like a misapplication of a sort of transitive property.
As I said, there is a lot to say about that. The idea is that it creates a culture around aviation that ultimately produces good commercial pilots. Pilots from countries where recreational aviation is not as developed are usually not as good, I saw an article about that but I don't remember it. I think it was about a crash that could have be prevented had the pilot reacted correctly.
Ok, a common path for a commercial pilot in the US is to start to learn how to fly in a small aircraft with an instructor. Then fly by himself. But flying is expensive, so many future pilots become instructors themselves, so that they can do a lot of hours and pay for qualifications that become more expensive as planes become bigger and more complex.
When they finally get to fly an airliner, they have a lot of experience, and more importantly a lot of it as a pilot in command (flying solo is being a pilot in command). Not only that but being a flight instructor is excellent training, you have to let your student make mistakes while guaranteeing his safety. In the end, you have pilots with great decision making abilities, which is one of the main reason for them to be there the first place.
This is only possible in countries with a strong aviation culture. Without airfields, without people who just want to fly for fun, you can't be a flight instructors if you have no one to instruct.
Some countries do not have that culture, and future pilots are instead trained in flight schools that train them to be operational as quickly as possible. Problem is: they spent almost all of their flight hours as students, so maybe they know how to fly, but they are not used to take responsibility for the plane.
So letting people dick around in the sky may not be necessary, but certainly contributes to making better pilots.