> Whenever you have abstraction, you have lost what it means to be an engineer.

That's an interesting observation. I'd say engineering does have abstractions, but they're much better. For example, treating an RSJ as a simple uniform piece of material is an abstraction. In reality it is a crazily complex mesh of crystals. But the abstraction is simple and well studied, so it can be used reliably.

Programming abstractions are less reliable. Even commonly used ones like "the filesystem" and "the heap" are vastly more complex. It is almost impossible to remember all the possible hazards when you use them.