Extending and nuancing the concept: putting minor theoretical contributions to work in social theory

How to theorise has been a recent topic of debate which, conducted in terms outside of ontology and epistemology, has explored the size, meaning, and complexification of theoretical contributions. In this article I discuss how empirical results are made into a theoretical contribution through extending and nuancing existing concepts. I present limitations and biases of this strategy, and then discuss the potential merit of an alternative and more flexible strategy. I focus the discussion of extension and nuance to the contribution to existing frameworks. I argue that extension and nuance can be problematic if conforming too closely to an existing framework in terms of intensification, a singular understanding, commensurability of data and theory, and hidden predicates. These themes highlight the complexity in evaluating theoretical contributions. Mirroring the problematisation of conforming to existing frameworks, I propose the alternatives of agnostic concepts and equivocal typologies as strategies that allow for building on an existing framework without being limited to its definition or typology. This article contributes a systemic examination of the frameworks and strategies that produce extension and nuance, and uses that examination to make clear strategies of agnostic and equivocal theory to minimise problematic contributions.