I've met Martin Fowler. Super nice guy. I don't question his intent.

It just seems to me that "software architects" see the world in abstractions. Another friend calls this world view "enterprisey".

Fowler and I would likely agree on the principles of reducing the cost of change, DRY, YAGNI, etc.

But we wouldn't agree on the mechanics for achieving those goals.

I don't have an opinion about Fowler, but whenever someone is pushing this sort of bafflegab, it can be a useful exercise to ask them: why can't you speak simply and directly? None of these concepts are difficult -- it's not a lecture on topology or Lie algebras or something. So why so much impenetrable jargon?

Totally.

My thesis is that some people truly think that way. What I find to be obtuse, obfuscated, tortured, overwrought is apparently pure poetry to others.

On the flip side, I know that how I work drives many other people absolutely nuts.