The OP doesn't really address the headline but I'll take a shot at it: learning about "deep learning", or any variation of machine/statistical learning, is a mandate for humans because it is necessary to understand the fundamentals and limitations of the machines and systems that increasingly govern our life. Understanding is a minimum; the ideal is that with this knowledge, we not only use machines appropriately in our lives, but to vastly improve our ability to consume and disseminate knowledge.

It's been a long time since humans posed a challenge to computers in chess, and yet freestyle chess competitions aren't dominated by supercomputers, but by (relatively novice) chess players assisted by computers. Why should we settle for a false dichotomy of human versus machine when we can do so much better with cooperation and augmentation?