For organic chemistry yes. There is a ton of information you need to be familiar with before you can begin to apply it. The corresponding lab course was just as challenging.
Assuming that there is no such sequencing issue involved for organic chemistry as it's commonly taught, and that a large number of 'brute facts' are an inherent feature of the subject matter, how is frantic, mechanical transcription a good use of in-class time in which students have access to a subject-matter expert? Transcription doesn't require the presence or time of an expert. Wouldn't it be better for students to perform such transcription outside of class, especially in advance of the lecture, and/or to receive paper copies of the contents of the board printed with double line spacing and wide margins at the beginning of class? In that case, both class time and students' notes could be better focused on questions, mistakes, and generally material of more substance than memorization.
Is there an assumption (or maybe an understanding informed by experience) that students just won't do such transcription (and thus not memorize the facts they need to) if they're not prompted to do so in class?
In current child development theories and books, it is taught that young children lack in "precausal thinking"/"transductive reasoning". Where a child does not understand things like "put on your jacket, it is cold outside" or "bring an umbrella, it will rain later".
It is said it is better to teach them "backwards" - let them feel that it is cold outside (problem) then tell them to put on a jacket (solution). But this type of reasoning reverses as we grow and develop.