That's the thing... many abstract theories ARE useful. You can start out with a "what if?" and then look for ways to find out whether your "what if?" is possible, desired, necessary, etc. all of which would never have happened if you'd insisted that no theorizing was possible without FIRST knowing all those facts.This can be a big irritation to detail centric and bottom lining types! Especially when they ask "what do you think about this" and you want to answer "see what? You made it out of thin air, with weak data - what is there to see? Come back when you have something useful".
I always assume the research has been done into everything I could conceivably think of. But that's not the point(It often takes a bit of effort for me to not just post hundreds of "Did you know research has already been done on this topic?" Do I get to ask if Ns will ever start putting some effort into their thoughts before throwing them around everywhere... or would that be rude? )
It wouldn't be necessarily rude to ask that question, but y'know... perhaps you could allow for the idea that the 'throwing around' actually *is* the process of putting thought in? Especially with NP's, it's done in the open air. What you're hearing is the PROCESS, not the result. I don't personally get why you would see it as such a bad thing that somebody just thinks aloud... do we all have to have our thoughts sit an entrance exam before they're allowed expression??