Keiundraj,
Let me be clear, there is a significant difference I was hoping for you to understand: 1. One can be trained how to safely operate an aircraft in a very controlled environment. 2. Can the student use their experience and maturity to operate in the real world of business flying an aircraft safely.

Back to 1. All training programs are theoretically designed to be safe, repetitive, and produce defined minimum results in a minimum amount of time (Costs). ATP, Flightsafety, Parks, UND, ERAU, etc, and all highly rated programs, teach monkey skills well. But they don't pass along much else in a programmed experiential fashion. You may get some, but it is ad hoc.

2. What TwotterDriver is discussing is the other half of the equation: These experiences are mentored (like TwotterDrivers post). A well trained, experienced and mature Capt.
The friction points of the real world outside are your reality, not the protective and highly regulated training program. Two pilots know how to safely operate an aircraft (eg the EMB-120). They have different experience levels. In the same set of circumstances, one may choose not to operate for safety reasons. The other one operates and lands safely. Perhaps luck,
Are they the same? No, they are not. The first may have learned to assess the risk factor, done in many airlines, corporate, and military ops and wisely chose not to operate despite extreme pressure to go, sometimes at the cost of their job. But they are alive and so are the customers who could care less because they don't realize this professional kept them from harm. What he/she is paid to do. A difficult call. The second pilot may be well trained, just didn't have the experience or knowledge to not operate. Likely, they learned alot and will use that in the future to operate more safely and in their revised risk assesment analysis. Unfortunately, sometimes an accident occurs, and the NTSB lays fault on some element. Inexperience or complacency are causes.
My own admission. In the past, I have have been the second pilot far to many times, not out of stupidity, but lack of experience. Fortunately, good training saved the day, but also a measure of luck. As time goes along, and the hours build up (which only measures the opportunity to gain experience) one becomes more like the TwotterDriver, and learns how to deal with the "non flying" pressures to fly safely. I enjoy learning from these pilots, they share and mentor from their experience, Great leveraging of aviation talent. The argument is that 300+ hour CFI's teaching other PPL students do not have this experience in the business aviation side of the coin, they may be excellent at teaching the curriculum though (as they should) but that is all. (The military equivalent is the USAF First Assignment IP and the Navy's Selectively Retained Graduate, pilot graduates who immediately instruct new students like ATP's etc. ) The difference is: The military only allows a few of these well trained folks to remain to teach, if any at all, the military still invests in the fleet experienced pilots who have "been there, done that" to pass along the stuff TwotterDriver was doing.
Example that applies: A good CFI/IP can teach anyone monkey skills, "Rote". A very necessary learning skill. I can teach anyone how to land on the back of an aircraft carrier, only catch is you would have to have to want to do this. Let me continue with this example. To do this, we do carrier style landings for a year in virtually all other training. In the carrier qualification phase, the student does nothing else but field carrier landings (T&G's) once or twice per day for a week with specific briefs to prepare them for their solo trip to the boat.
The requirements to let the student land at the ship is very closely controlled and restrictive, weather, sea state, distance from shore, etc. etc is controlled to ensure maximum safety for the inexperienced getting initial experience. Additionally, very experienced fleet pilots make the go-no go decisions and lead the formation of students to the boat, all we want the student to do is land on the ship. Don't need to navigate the way out, figure out how to get into the pattern with other aircraft, etc. All they have to do is stay on my wing. I will drop them off, all they need to do is turn into the pattern and get picked up by another special instructor, the landing signal officer. Everyone is watching the student through the whole process. Fast forward a year later after they are checked out in the Fleet and deployed. All bets are off, you operate in an environment that is 'operational', not a closely regulated training environment. The intent is that the individual is using their experience from the training environments (mind you same ships, etc) with alot less control. Hope this helps.