That's a very well-reasoned point of view.
I don't really disagree with it, but I do have one big caveat that I'd like to wrap around it. This caveat is going to draw a LOT of boo's from the audience I'm sure. I'll just have to deal with it

.
It's one thing to take great tracks and make them sound even better through extreme creative processing. It's another thing altogether to try and take marginal tracks and make them sound great through extreme corrective processing. I personally think the philosophy you describe is great for the former, but a disaster for the latter.
If one can lay and mix great tracks as a minimalist, and then lay on the black boxes to take them to the next level a la Brian Eno or Alan Parsons or (insert your favorite mixing producer here), that's great. If one needs to lay on the extreme processing just to get their tracks to be of pro-level "listening quality", then I think the black boxes are acting more like mother's little helpers to the engineer and are really cramping their engineering abilities and mixes, and not making them better.
To put a Zen-like twist on it, it's not until one *does not need* to use extreme processing to get a good-sounding mix that they should open themselves up to the possibility of doing so.
There's another thread around here somewhere where a guy is saying that his mixes just are not up to snuff and is wondering what toys he should spend money on next to make his mixes sound better. He lists in detail what he already has; nothing to write home about, it's entry-level gear for the most part, with a few brands mixed in there that many in these forums would hold their noses around.
I haven't responded to that thread directly, but I keep thinking that thread over.I keep settling on the same conclusive thought that he should just save his money for a while. The fact is that Brian Eno or Alan Parsons - or whoever you plugged in as your favorite mixing producer a few paragraphs ago - could take his gear list and his room the way it is and make a Grammy-nominated album with it. Not just because of the cache of their names, but because they are good engineers.
Not only is this guy's gear not the problem with the quality of his mixes, better gear - or adding more plugs to his signal chain - is not the solution to them either. Additionally, if he were ready to truely take advantage of more/better gear, the very first indication of that readiness is he'd be able to identify exactly where the gear is holding him back and would know what to get next.
To bring this all back to the point of this thread, if one needs to use a carload of plug-ins just to make a listenable mix, they probably should go back to basics and learn how to do it without the plugs first. If, however, they have reached that level of competency (a level I am never quite convinced I can consistantly hit myself yet) and wish to lay on the plugs as a form of creative sound shaping above and beyond that, then sure, they should go wild with it.
IMHO and all that legalese.
G.