Some scientists and many regular folks believe that "ad-hoc" solutions are uninteresting.
In artistic terms they have a point. Art is subjective, and if someone beleives that green color is better than orange, who am I to argue?
In practice, waht coutns are results, not elegance.
A good freind of me is consulting me about his various personal and financial troubles. I am usually listening confusingly, trying to illuminate a point, suggesting what feels for me a straight-forward idea, or, at times, suggesting a trick out of my magic hat.
It happened that I helped this guy immensely. And with those simplistic half thought-out advice. Nothing spectacular. Just a compatible idea in the right time.
In many areas there is already lots of knowledge. What is needed is good application. Finding the right values for the parameters (i.e. how much anger is optimal when you are brain washed with ad-hoc theories of me, all aspects and long term dynamics factored in).
relevance is what counts. Nobody cares about how "smart" a theory is. We care about its usefulness. Ad-hoc tricking is frequently the best thing to do by far.
Humans care about what they care about, and allow elegance and fiction to take care on itself.