Well, yes. So, in the hypothetical situation where classes are added just for styling, is it a given that the correct way to name it is a way that stays the same when the styling changes?
> in the hypothetical situation where classes are added just for styling
OK, a style-based class naming system
> is it a given that the correct way to name it is a way that stays the same when the styling changes
Not with a style-based naming system, in that case it's ok for the class name to change, and you can expect it to change often, which a lot of people argue is ok.
But like @welly said, herein lies the problem, or preference. The argument is exactly about whether you should name things in unchanging "decoupled" ways, or whether that doesn't work out in practice and it's simpler to just have utility styles.
OK, a style-based class naming system
> is it a given that the correct way to name it is a way that stays the same when the styling changes
Not with a style-based naming system, in that case it's ok for the class name to change, and you can expect it to change often, which a lot of people argue is ok.
But like @welly said, herein lies the problem, or preference. The argument is exactly about whether you should name things in unchanging "decoupled" ways, or whether that doesn't work out in practice and it's simpler to just have utility styles.