I did answer your question. You completely ignored what I wrote, maybe because you don't like being proven wrong.

I'm not sure if you are implying that I'm a "rationalist", but if you are, you're jumping to conclusions again. You have a glaring habit of making pretty bad assumptions and I really hope you change yourself. It's a very bad trait that appears to be pretty common in your responses.

I've never heard of this blog before this article or even rationalism, but your question made me curious about why he chose to refer to Murray. But instead of just jumping to conclusions and assuming things like you, I actually bothered to read the article. This is something you didn't do. Honestly, you should learn from this.