I understand where you are coming from. Changing what programming is is a difficult proposition to tackle. That is why my curiosity was peaked. The analogys you give in my opinion over simplify the issue. Too often, your analogies "assume away" the details. It reminds me of the manager who wants the magic button on his computer that magically intercpets his thoughts an makes it happen. The phrase "completely unrealistic" comes to mind. At some point, a programmer needs to lay down the code to make it work.

As far as my definiton of what programming is, I would have to say it is narrow since I make distinctions between programming, application development and analysis. I know many programmers who could never deliver an application. I know application developers who are not all that talented as far as programming is concerned. I know analysts that cannot write a line of programming code. Finally, I know programmers who analyze or design a solution to a problem if their life depended on it.

For sure, my definiton exists in the realm of the real world...