I suppose it's a case of 80/20, and this pervades a huge amount of modern education. Background information is pared-down to a minimum, and if the end goal - line first officers - is all that matters, then hard faith in the automatics makes absolute sense, if only from a management point of view. Of course, the random nature of the real world periodically cares little for stats, modelling, or theory, and this is where man still has a big role to play when something out of the ordinary happens.
I think automation is amazing, but I've never flown anything larger than a C150. I still marvel at the precision and grace of modern airliners. Even as passengers, we have become disconnected from the experience of flight; a recent trip on a 777 was more like a magic carpet than an aircraft. A quick look around the cabin during takeoff will show that most people won't even flinch at being recipients of over 100 years of knowledge and skill that can propel a 350 tonne object into the air, and 10000 miles away in a few hours, and repeat the trick endlessly. Familiarity is the root of indifference.
And yet...
The laws of physics are unchanged, and indifferent. The same information is being presented in the same form (more or less) to the pilot, and Airbus say their products fly just the same as anything else. Is there anything really new here?