Will social scientists' never-ending disputes over words ever end?

Social science literatures are rife with disputes over their key words. I show that they tend to conflate two activities. One of them I call "word goes first!" It concerns word uses and how to appraise them. The other I call "distinction goes first!" It concerns distinctions and classifications and how to appraise them. For each activity, social science communities should get clear on what to do, what to circumvent, and what's at stake. I argue that both are practical reason activities. They should be partly driven by the common good, justice, and equality.