on abstraction

I’ve come across the word “abstraction” in exactly three contexts. The first is in computer science, where “abstraction” is the hiding away of details within a black box whose interfaces are well defined. The second is in mathematics, where “abstraction” is the induction from special cases. The third is in art, where “abstraction” seems to be independence from concrete meaning. Abstract is “drag away” in Latin, so it is likely to be defined by its opposition — that which it is “dragged away” from. No wonder it has so many different meanings. Interpreted thusly, the first context for “abstraction” may better be termed “opacity” in opposition to “transparency”; the second, “genericity” in opposition to “specificity”; and the third, “notionality” in opposition to “concreteness.”

What is the point of abstraction? Is there something terrible about transparency, specificity, or concreteness; are they not qualities that we praise, for the clarity that they provide?
(Read the article)