Nice article.....but you might as well be arguing against using cliches.
I don't like naming beers until they deserve them. I have a number of beers that have working titles that my co-brewer (brother) and I use amongst ourselves at our secret homebrewing meetings. I like names that have names of historical (also phiolosophical), personal, or convey a sense about the beer, its ingredients, makers or the effect the beer has on you...more often, though, out in the real world, I like the name better than the beer.....
My only real named beer is Bridesmaid Oktoberfest. It won 2nd best of show in two consecutive local competitions in 2011 (one a Oktoberfest only comp)....this beer has earned her name....and since Oktoberfest is a rememberance of a celebration of the wedding (of prince Ludwig?)....it becomes doubly befitting.
I use "panty dropper" to describe a family of beers that belie their ABV. Enough of those and I might lose mine...., but no, not an original or particular pleasing name.
Names are important, as the written word was developed to describe images and make lasting impressions...that is why we have a hard time remembering anything that happened to us as children before we learn to speak. The names of styles are also important and the debates amongst us between Dark American, Cascadian, BIPA, Noonanian or other iterations are time well spent. Nobody is arguing over the number classification....it is the name that stirs the soul and sparks the imagination.
But your reference to Shakespeare is incorrect. Juliet was arguing that a name is arbitrary and does more harm than good. Juliet's suggestion in her next line past the one about the rose (as well as Denny's point made above):
"So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name;
And for that name, which is no part of thee,Take all myself."
She offers herself in exchange for his name....of course, it all ends in tears.