Computer science is not software engineering. You also don't get physicists and mathematicians determine engineering best practices for precisely the same reason.
For example, the reference to Shanley's design principle is not only wrong in it's core (aerospace engineering instead of civil engineering) it also completely misses the underlying design requirements and constraints. More precisely, aerospace pays a premium for weight, thus design requirements emphasize the need to optimize structural systems wrt structural weight. This design choice favours operational economy at the expense of production costs, maintainability, robustness, and simplifying analysis.
None of this applies to software development, or even civil engineering structures.
Appeals to authority are a dangerous fallacy.
But generally, algorithms researchers seem to not care about abstractions, as witnessed by TeX and LaTeX in multiple ways.
That's probably because when you really need to invent a fancy algorithm (which is their job), that will often not be built out of reusable components.
Knowing that the one who is possibly the most respected person in the field of computer science has an opinion that goes against the current trends gives us perspective.
In the same way, I don't fully agree with Richard Stallman's activism and Linus Torvald's famous rants, but I'm glad there are people like that to shake things up.