I think I’ve always found the discussion of abstract ideas annoying – how do we even know if we are referring to the same thing? The literature on how “buzzwords” do exactly just that is great support for my annoyance. I think letting the empirics speak first, with as open a mind as possible (difficult, no less), and then sieving out the logics to theory is a much preferred strategy for me. Ideally of course, it should be dialectic.