Give me feedback on Expert Trap

I wrote “Expert trap: How hindsight, hierarchy, confirmation biases break knowledge and make it hard to access“ Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
I put significant effort into writing this article, yet received limited feedback. While I am quite happy with its content, I am keen to learn how to refine the article and to improve my writing and thinking skills in general. The article was originally posted in three parts, but I'm considering re-posting it as a single piece (this approach was effective with my AI Revolution project from a while ago)
I’d appreciate any advice on improving the article’s epistemics, clarity, and writing style, or any other elements impacting its reach and reception. I would value a comprehensive review after a complete reading, but a brief feedback focusing on why it might not have been engaging or why you stopped reading is also appreciated.

I'll be awarding mana for helpful comments and responses to comments, with amounts ranging from M25 to M5000 for the best answers. I aim to reward most answers. Initially, I'll distribute smaller rewards between M25 and M200 to quickly mark answers I find helpful. Later, I plan to allocate the remaining bounty to the top responses.
Note-1: I may not allocate the entire bounty if there are only a few low-quality answers. Note-2: Leave likes under your fav answers as they will likely influence my evaluation.

I've shared this article on both the EA Forum and LessWrong, but it has received minimal engagement.
I'm already planning to bring the extended Epistemic Status section from the beginning to the Q&A section at the end.
My intended audience ranges from rationalist to a broader demographic, akin to readers of "Wait But Why."

Related questions