In scientific papers and textbooks there is the concept of being 'elegant'. This means that as you derive an equation, replacing terms, simplyfying, etc, you use as few steps as possible. And often simply skip a bunch of steps in between each equation you put down, without explaining how you got from equation 1 to 2 to 3, etc. This is elegance and it's done to make the author look intelligent, with the unfortunate result that the paper reads like gibberish to the majority of readers; not that the readers admit this, the author writes borderline gibberish to look intelligent and the readers pretend to easily understand it for the same reason.

The idea of course leaks over into textbooks also. And this idea goes beyond elegant derivations of course. In philosophy for example one must also be right on the edge of incomprehensible or they simply won't be taken seriously.

And so the selfish interest of one's intellectual reputation to a large extent trumps the concern of successfully transmitting knowledge to others.

I recall a devil I knew. The head of his department. Had his name on over 200 papers. The most important concerning an aerosl focuser of great use in nanotechnology. Incredibly simplistic idea actually. Much like my impacter but even more crude at heart. The papers published concerning it? Absolute gibberish. To the point that I'm sure the majority of people (in the profession) could not even make any sense of what the device actually was.

I recall my MS advisor. A total fraud in that he was simply utterly clueless and his main goal each day consisted of trying to conceal this fact. Something similar goes on for most of them to varying extents, although he was an extreme example. Did he feel shame? I don't think so. The unspoken (unthought) rule was that a fake facade was an essential part of one's work.

And who actually really wants to be a part of such things?

Perhaps it plays a role in so many PhDers from the third world. The idiotic usual explanation is that Americans don't have as good an education system. The reality is mainly that graduate students are treated horribly. People don't actually want to be 30 years old and still with no permanent job, working long hours, making hardly any money, etc. Someone from a third world country that has a life expectancy decades less is far more likely to put up with such things in order to try to escape their home country. But perhaps also the above plays a role. The politics. The dishonesty. It's everywhere of course. But the more education, the worse it is.

As to the idea that our education system is inferior, the actual (unspoken) purpose though of our education system is that of a holding pen for a surplus work force. With our current technology we simply don't need everyone working about as much as we can stand. So, of course, instead of a shorter work week, unemployment increases and youth spend longer and longer in school, getting their PhD's etc in making cheeseburgers (in effect).

It's never admitted that it's just a holding pen. Some place to put them instead of just having free time. It can't actually be reformed because that's all it really is. And we won't admit what it actually is.

Yet we're told we must reform our education system (our holding pen for the surplus workforce) to compete in science and technology with all the foreign people (the desperately poor whom are willing to put up with just about anything) who come to America for PhDs.