It's worse than that, though. He's actively arguing against expertise. He's saying you're better at your job if you know a little about a lot than if you know a lot about a little.
It was the professional expertise section that did it for me. First off, whoa nobody has ever thought to apply a concrete agitator to cleaning up oil spills. ORLY. I was unaware "cleaning up oil spills" was a common and well-structured avocation. Then somehow he implies that "range" is what led a patent attorney used to working with organic chemicals to discover a novel way of making an organic chemical because - wait for it - he's an attorney.
Then he went as far as arguing that amateurs were better at predicting the fall of the Soviet Union than the professionals.
Stakes for an amateur failing to correctly understand the Soviet Union? 0
Stakes for a professional failing to correctly understand the Soviet Union?