Yes. The same line of argument can be used to suggest why ensemble libraries can be so helpful when getting started, with individual instruments being drawn in initially for detail. Personally I came to VIs with lots of training and experience with live players and traditional orchestration and I found ensemble libraries initially much easier to work with once I got my head around what they were doing. Eventually I had to move away from ensemble libraries to gain more control (though I still find them exceptionally useful for sketching and if I need to work fast). Undoubtedly some of this, probably even a lot of it, is personal preference.
This makes sense.
Coming to samples without already knowing how to write orchestral music, I found that a lot of I was coming up with via ensemble libraries was at best kind of bland, and at worst, derivative mush. (Admittedly this might not be entirely the fault to the ensemble libraries themselves ).
If solo instruments were good enough (and a few of them are starting to be, though they're can be prohibitively expensive to a beginner) I would advocate starting with learning how to compositions around detailed individual solo lines, and building from there.
But lacking adequately expressive solo instruments, I think that something like SStS has enough expressiveness, on a broad enough palette that learning I link learning how to craft individual lines.
I would distinguish this from 'texture' libraries - Tundra or OACE being the ultimate examples. Which are fantastic for a particular 'painterly' approach. But unless you're writing ambient music, I'd argue this should be coupled with a library that lets you write in some finer detail.
Undoubtedly personal preference though. I'm sure the whatever the pedagogical theory implicit in the Albion One "Start writing film music *now*" is is perfectly valid also.