I don't like the assertion at all because so many techniques are held to be "deep learning" and because even when specific techniques are built on an analogy of

I don't like the assertion at all because so many techniques are held to be "deep learning" and because even when specific techniques are built on an analogy of this sort (think Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithms) they do not work "because" they are "like" the physical processes that served as an inspiration. Names are useful, but only as a aide to thinking. Does this help us think about these techniques?