There's definitely some that hold CQRS, DDD, TDD, ... as _the_ way to design software and over-engineer around it, so I can understand some pushback.

Knowing those patterns is very helpful as a way to think about design problems, as long as you have the common sense to realize applying the pattern "by the book" is often overkill and you can just take some ideas out of it.

That article conflates as "Pure engineering" both reducing a software system to a small set of cohesive concepts, and architecture astronauts, when those are polar opposites.