Is there utility in branding something, in an effort to address and counteract the symptoms that give the thing its name?

Yes; you have a point here. I think there can be utility in branding something for this purpose. The only danger I see here is if the original purpose of using a “name tag” (to address and counteract the symptoms that the name entails) becomes lost to the name itself. What I mean by this, is there’s a tendency to forget that using a brand is simply a tool to describe a list of symptoms, and rather than working to fix the symptoms, there’s a human tendency to use the name itself as a scapegoat: just blame it on the brand name, rather than investigate and treat the individual symptoms.

I agree with you, except that I don’t know how a desire to understand ourselves solves any problems.

The idea here is the basic concept of understanding what you’re working with. We could use the analogy of a mechanic: In order for a mechanic to effectively diagnose and fix a malfunctioning engine, they need to possess a fundamental knowledge of that engine-type. You have to understand a subject before you can work to change and/or fix it.