"LaTeX users being more satisfied than Microsoft Word users and (2) KN claiming that Microsoft Word is more efficient"
There is no conflict in this statement, despite the author's claim. People who walk to work (for reasonable distances) will also tend to feel better, even though it took them longer.
Efficiency and satisfaction are different things. One is subjective ("how do you feel?"), the other objective (amount of work done per time). You are free to assign any relative value you like to these objectives, neither one is objectively "more important" than the other in all cases.
But entirely denying a measurable result while being offended by the idea that, maybe, the measurable satisfaction LaTeX gives you could also, theoretically, possibly, cloud your judgement, is silly. It's literally a textbook example of a cognitive bias!
I suspect the root cause here may be how much the tech scene loves to pretend to be "objective" / "neutral" / "scientific". If people were to consider the idea that they are just bundles of emotions, like everyone else, and, most importantly that there's nothing wrong with that, it would vastly improve some parts of the discourse.
You chose LaTeX because (a) you prefer to spend an hour with a keyboard to spending 30 min with a mouse, because (b) it's part of the identity you've chosen for yourself, because (c) it gives your work that cool Bell Labs vibe, because (d) your peers would judge you, because (e) your peers chose it for you, because (e) you didn't invest a month into learning it to abandon it, because (f) you built this really cool continuous integration pipeline from your lab to Nature, or because (g) you're the type of person that noticed I used (e) twice, and those people just tend towards LaTeX.
Some of these are emotional reasons. That doesn't mean they are invalid! You don't need to rationalise them. Be irrational and proud of it–it's been cool among a majority of numbers for a long time.