Answer

As a rule, I do not accept claims that categorically reject one approach to learning or another. The abstractions do not need to be connected to the wording of the Talmud. They are abstractions that we make in order to explain the Talmud. Sometimes an abstraction is unreasonable, and then it should be rejected, but as I said, I do not accept any such categorical claim (categorically 🙂 ). This is like the midrash about Moses our Teacher in Rabbi Akiva’s study hall, where he did not know what they were saying until he heard them say that it was a law given to Moses at Sinai, and then his mind was put at ease.
In my view, the new style of learning is a very powerful tool, if it is used properly. On the contrary, the old style of learning often mixes unlike things together because of the lack of conceptual and analytical analysis.