I don't think this is a strong argument against calling it "prompt engineering".
Engineers have built systems based around things they didn't fully understand for centuries.
We have learned an enormous amount about materials engineering and metallurgy since building the Brooklyn Bridge for example.
If you don't fully understand how a system you are building on top of works, the engineering approach is to methodically experiment. That's what prompt engineering is.
(One argument that works for not calling prompt engineering "engineering" is to point out that in many disciplines engineering requires certifications and licensing - the same reason people sometimes argue against "software engineering" as an engineering discipline.)
Engineers have built systems based around things they didn't fully understand for centuries.
We have learned an enormous amount about materials engineering and metallurgy since building the Brooklyn Bridge for example.
If you don't fully understand how a system you are building on top of works, the engineering approach is to methodically experiment. That's what prompt engineering is.
(One argument that works for not calling prompt engineering "engineering" is to point out that in many disciplines engineering requires certifications and licensing - the same reason people sometimes argue against "software engineering" as an engineering discipline.)