I would prefer not to name any design theory with complex name and tough terminology instead I prefer to stick with basic terminology and name it as simple as possible.
Being a designer, we have to make the user understand with minimal effort. Giving any theory any complex naming terminology will keep the user away. My personal experience is keeping it as simple as possible. We don’t want a user to get confused. Atomic design theory is very helpful and very much usable. There is no doubt about that fact but giving it complex terminology is not fulfilling its purpose and moreover, for half part, we are using chemistry terms and for another half part we are using other regular terms. To make it a single entity, we should follow one style for naming design system.
We have seen many design languages i.e. IBM framework, Material design, Skype style-guide, etc and atomic design is taking design languages to the next level. This is the theory, which will make those languages much more usable and much more effective.
Brad Frost has said himself in his book ATOMIC DESIGN.
“The language of atoms, molecules, and organisms carry with it a helpful hierarchy for us to deliberately construct the components of our design systems. But ultimately we must step into language that is more appropriate for our final output and makes more sense to our clients, bosses, and colleagues. Trying to carry the chemistry analogy too far might confuse your stakeholders and cause them to think you’re a bit crazy. Trust me.”