Would patterns exist if we had no name for them? In my opionion, definitely yes. So giving them a name doesn't change the nature of patterns. Problems arise whe

Would patterns exist if we had no name for them? In my opionion, definitely yes. So giving them a name doesn't change the nature of patterns. Problems arise when a, now named, pattern gets misused. The misuse is therefore always commited by the developer. The two main critic points I've read in the comments were: - Developers try to find a problem to use a pattern they know This error is mostly commited by people who learn the first time of patterns and are giddy to use them. I wonder if this was less likely to happen, had the GOF included a warning about this in their book. - Developers keep using the wrong terminology and this causes patterns to become squishy Just stick to the GOF terminology and your good to go. In my eyes, the patterns discussion is just an indicator for a greater "problem": Anyone can become a software developer. I won't elaborate on the positive aspects of this. But it's clear that areas with a higher entrance bar, like law or health, have a greater professionalism and, among other advantages, a standardized terminology.