Job titles matter to people, why pay someone a raise for being good when you can add an extra buzzword to their job description or change their job title to som

Job titles matter to people, why pay someone a raise for being good when you can add an extra buzzword to their job description or change their job title to something that sounds posh? It is a win-win for the company, they can introduce their 'junior assistant' as 'senior engineer' to impress whomever is being given the show and tell. What I find objectionable to the pigeon-holing is that 'engineering' is one of the most creative disciplines there is, whether you are engineering a bridge or even software. But the wider world of artists can't see this. If you use maths to make something then that is not 'creative' it is 'technical'. This segregation of 'technical' and 'artistic' starts out in school, so if you end up as an artist making brown pots then that is deemed 'artistic' and thereby wonderfully creative despite the fact that brown pots have been made in a similar way since before recorded history. If you teach an AI system that has been trained on the Utah Teapot to make a brown pot in polygons then that can't be 'artistic', even though art only ever innovates when new mediums come along. There is a related wrong-phrase with 'Computer Science'. How much science is there is new ways of doing things with ones and zeroes? Or is this 'technology' that we are talking about? I am not entirely happy with the word 'developer' either. Therefore the phrase 'computer programmer' works for a general audience as in 'I just do programming' or 'oh, here is one of our programmers' (before door to darkened room gets shut). If your work gets used by people then the validation should come from the metrics that come from that, not from a title that is slightly inflated.