Van de Poel introduces a crucial asymmetry into conceptual engineering by distinguishing specific concepts, which possess relatively delineated functions, from generic concepts embedded in extensive conceptual repertoires. Specific concepts may be locally designed and evaluated; generic concepts resist such treatment because their functions are diffuse, their meanings distributed and their authority socially contested. The paper thereby limits the engineering metaphor precisely where it becomes politically seductive. Transforming concepts such as woman, nature or justice cannot be understood as the controlled replacement of discrete components; it requires intervention in a wider social, linguistic and institutional ecology. The methodological contribution is diagnostic: before attempting conceptual repair, one must establish the scale and entrenchment of the target. The work’s bridge to urbanism is especially productive. A specific concept resembles a designed element, while a generic concept resembles a city: neither author nor boundary is singular, and change occurs through cumulative interventions, conflicts and appropriations rather than comprehensive command.
