Another example is Abelian groups, which should just be called commutative groups. Though that example brings up a decent counterargument to the thesis: ”group

Another example is Abelian groups, which should just be called commutative groups. Though that example brings up a decent counterargument to the thesis: ”groups”, ”rings” and ”fields” all have descriptive names, but that doesn’t help a bit, they’re still mad confusing. They’d almost be easier to pick apart if they were named after people.