As the article already states, there is a well known phenomenon in aviation called automation-induced complacency. So, yes, if you automate landing to the extent that human pilots no longer pay attention to abnormal signals that indicate something is wrong, or no longer feel the need to train or stay vigilant, it can make things more dangerous. There is plenty of research on this, but here's the first that came up in a cursory search:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20020021642/downloads/20...

A more recent example is the Boeing 737-Max where there was a focus on automating trim control. In that case, the automation made the system more complex, to the detriment of a pilot understanding and reacting to an abnormal operation.

We should also be careful that we don't create a false dichotomy between "all automated or no automation", or an expectation that more automation is always better. The goal should be the right balance that increases reliability/safety.

The fact that the autopilot will loudly disengage if there is a serious enough control surface failure to cause an upset is more than enough support IMO.