“ The author states that programming has been mythicized more than any other profession”
This is false.
“that myth causes a barrier of entry”
The article conflates talent with “genius”. Lacking talent for X is always a barrier for doing X. The question is, what does it mean to have talent for X, and is having talent genetic or learned? The latter is almost always the case.
“and that non-mythical programmers have created useful tools nonetheless.”
Another conflation … is the myth about programming, or programmers? Of course “non-mythical programmers have created useful tools”, since *mythical* programmers do not exist, by definition.
“I agree with this premise.”
It’s not a premise, it’s an assertion, or series of assertions.
You then go on to talk exclusively about passion, not talent. Of course there are plenty of doctors and lawyers without passion, but would you go to a doctor without talent, or hire a lawyer without talent?
Good programmers need to be good at reasoning and precision. You and the diarist lack these skills.