a rose by any other name...

In Shakespeare's well-known play Romeo and Juliet, one of the lines that portrays the central message of the play and all of the struggles that the two characters go through is: 

"What's in a name? that which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet;

So Rome would, were he not Romeo call'd,

Retain that dear perfection which he owes

Without that title. (II.ii.47-51)

Juliet was saying that a name is something that has no meaning at all, and that she loves “Montague”, but not the actual name or the family, but Romeo as a person. What this quote means is that what matters is what something is, not necessarily what it is called, and that its name will not change its nature or characteristics. Likewise, a rose can be called another name, but it will still have the same smell as when it was referred to as a “rose.”

I agree with Shakespeare. A name is not everything that something is. Although it is true that if something’s name changes, your perception of it changes, that something itself will not necessarily change. For example, if roses were called “stinkbuds”, even though you would perceive them differently, they would still smell the same as roses. Likewise, in the case of brand names, sometimes we perceive goods that are from famous brand as being better than ones from we have never heard of. In that case, despite the fact that we are judging it based on its name, and we may perceive the two similar goods differently, they are, all in all, the same thing.

Also, even in cases where people legally change their names because they dislike their given names, the people themselves are not the ones that change; only their title or label changes. It is true that one’s identity may be linked to one’s name, but one’s name is not the only thing that composes one’s identity.