* I'll happily defend the use of the term dysfunctional programming. Using this term serves quite a lot of purpose, in particular, among other things, to break a false dichotomy that regularly misleads. Your next question emphasises this, unknowingly I assume.
* Yes, there are legitimate complaints about functional programming. However, there are many "arguments" that are "not convinced of the merits", which simply argue from ignorance. I am not interested in discussion at this level, unless it's ultimately constructive i.e. teaching.
None of the points made in the original post are compelling. They can all be easily over-turned. I can also make predictions about how much is understood based on the points made (there are many examples of this, raising my confidence that this is simply a very far-out misunderstanding). These predictions would help for teaching.
I am offering an invitation to remedy the misunderstanding. I do not care to address arguments from ignorance.