Sorry. Not even close. Source: I actually studied Phisolophy/Logic at Uni. Good try though.
Also, your aircraft example is absolutely ridiculous.
This isn't an appeal to purity at all. This is about domain knowledge and experience.
A more appropriate example might be the contrast between someone who has only done 3D printing now deciding to design and make parts meant for CNC machining. The lack of expertise and understanding will result in some pretty serious problem.
Another example, this time about software development. I have over ten years of professional software development using Forth. Someone coming to Forth from, say, Python, is likely to make an mess until they understand how to approach problems in Forth. I also have about ten years professional coding experience using APL. Same thing. Someone coming to APL from other languages is going to run into problems until they gain enough knowledge to write APL.
Appeal to authority.
PS: I studied philosophy too.
I am telling you that I evaluated your claim, I didn’t google it or ask ChatGPT.
This is the "no true scotsman" fallacy.
Languages can be designed so that less than perfectly knowledgeable programmers fall into the pit of success, or they can be designed so that they fall into the pit of failure.
For people making your argument, I like to provide this challenge: Go take a flight on a 737 MAX that hasn't had its MCAS fixed/disabled. That should be fine, right? After all, no "true" pilot ought to disregard one sentence on page 437 of the flight manual that they weren't even given during a 1 hour training video. A true professional pilot memorises the engineering blueprints, the source code of the avionics, and the wiring schematics, surely. So you have nothing to fear! The plane is "safe", and pilots can be trusted to be knowledgeable.
Go buy that ticket.