As to how that helps: it doesn't help you solve implementation problems, it helps in designing the software to do what the client wants in a way they will like.
It is hard to put yourself in the shoes of a different person to design something for them if you only hang out with people like you and only use software built for people like you.
As a concrete example: what would a piece of software for artists be like if your only-engineering coworkers designed it vs. you having some input? By the way, it would definitely be either a portfolio hosting service or some kind of art database software. What problem do artists have that could use some software help that they aren't even aware exists?
If nothing else, you might be more interesting to work with, have a clearer communication style, better taste in evaluating what "looks good", etc. etc.
These aren't a substitute for skill, but past a certain skill threshold other things start play more significant roles.
Edit: I really don't understand this pattern of down voting comments without offering a rebuttal of any kind. What exactly about this comment was against HN guidelines? Last time I checked, disagreeing with a comment wasn't grounds for down voting.
I didn't learn to write code until my late twenties. I have a fine arts degree. My early and mid twenties were focused on activities unrelated to technology. I have a reasonably large amount of life experience unrelated to programming. I haven't found that this experience gives me an edge in solving problems in my job as a programmer. Can you provide concrete examples that demonstrate this idea that people who code less outside of work are more effective problem solvers? I've seen this truism floating around quite a bit lately but have yet to see it demonstrated.