I seem to recall, many years ago, a conversation I had with one of my university student colleagues. He was reading for a Masters' in music, I was reading for my Masters' in electronics. My colleague was doing a bit of extra work studying to obtain his Licenciate of the Royal Academy of Music (LRAM) - an advanced piano playing qualification. He complained about how much his tutor had told him he had to "unlearn" in order to be successful in the written examination as in fact his musical theory knowledge far exceeded that of his examiners! On the other hand, I have read examination questions in hairdressing science where the examiner writing the questions on electricity clearly did not understand the difference between current and voltage.
It is the same in flying - although it is nice to apply total rigour to the answers to rigorously constructed questions in an examination, the aeronautical knowledge to be reasonably required of a commercial pilot need not be anything like as advanced as that for a test pilot or aeronautical design engineer. From the examples quoted above, IMHO (and only IMHO) the slightly imperfect standard of knowledge required by the FAA is totally adequate for a commercial pilot. Why encourage them to make life more difficult that it already is?
P.P.