Skip to main content

The Constraining Influence of the Revolutionary on the Growth of the Field


This article draws attention to a pattern of development within science and other intellectual research communities that has received virtually no mention. We propose that subsequent dominance of a research community by a figure responsible for significant innovation often delays progress in the field. During the period in which the revolutionary continues to influence research in a community, far too frequently the effect is to freeze progress within the limited directions which the revolutionary sanctions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Our thesis is sharpened by the fact that when Adler defected and established his “Society for Individual Psychology” nothing could be said against it (Sadger, 2005). Similarly Makasi (2008) says the same of Jung. Those with their new-founded communities were “increasingly defined by the authority of a charismatic leader.”.


  1. Agassi J (2014) Popper and his popular critics: Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend, and and Imre Lakatos. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Bever T, Rosenbaum B. (1970) Some lexical structures and their empirical validity. In: Language Sciences, 15–16, p. 354

  3. Bowler P (1986) Charles Darwin: the man and his influence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bowler P (1989) Evolution the History of an Idea. Univ of California Press, Berkeley. p 24

    Google Scholar 

  5. Box JF, Fisher AR (1978) The life of a scientist Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics. Wiley, New York

  6. Breger L (2009) A dream of undying fame. Basic Books, New York, pp 113–114. Note: Despite its wide reception, Breger’s book is not assayed further because, regrettably, it contributes little more than does Fritz Wittel’s, Freud’s first biographer and former disciple) in his “Freud and His Time, (1924).” Although Wittel’s book is noted in Breger’s bibliography it appears nowhere in the index or in his text

  7. Breger L (2000) Freud darkness in the midst of vision. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brett GS (1965) A history of psychology. Peters RS (ed). MIT Press, Cambridge, Masssachusetts

  9. Broad CD (1926) The philosophy of Francis Bacon: an address delivered at Cambridge on the occasion of the Bacon tercentenary. Cambridge, Massachusetts, p 67

  10. Chalmers D (2010) What is Consciousness? Retrieved from: p.5

  11. Choisy M (1963) Sigmund Freud: a new appraisal. Peter Owen, New York, p 5

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chomsky N (2015) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

  13. Chomsky N (1995) New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge University Press, Peter Owen, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chomsky N (1967) Syntactic structures. Mouton de Gruyter, NewYork

  15. Chomsky N (1968) Language and mind. Cambridge UP, Cambridge

  16. Collins AM, Loftus EF (1995) A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol Rev 82:407–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Darwin C, Barlow N (ed) (1993) The autobiography of Charles Darwin. W.W. Norton, New York, pp 109–182

  18. Darwin C (2012) The descent of man. Shine Classics, Madison Park, New Jersey, p 471

    Google Scholar 

  19. Darwin C (2003) The origin of the species: by means of natural selection. London Signet

  20. Deutsch H (1973) Freud and his pupil: a footnote to the history of the psychoanalytic movement. In: Ruitenbeck HME (ed) Freud as We Knew Him. Detroit, Michigan, p 175

    Google Scholar 

  21. Eisley L (1958a) Darwin’s century: evolution and the men who discovered it. Doubleday Anchor, New York, pp 142

  22. Eisley L (1958b) Darwin’s century: evolution and the men who discovered it. New York: Doubleday Anchor. p103

  23. Ellenberger HF (1970) The discovery of the unconscious: the history and evolution of dynamic psychiatry. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  24. Garfield E (1970) Indexing for studying science. Nature 227:669–671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fahnestock J (1999) Rhetorical figures in science. Oxford UP, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lakatos I (1970) As delineated In: The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois

  27. Fisher R (1957) Statistical methods for research workers. Oxford UP, London

  28. Jenkins F (1867) Review of the origin of species. North British Review. June 46. pp 277

  29. Giere RN (2005) Naturalism. In: Smith NWH (ed) A companion to the philosophy of science. Boston, Massachusetts, Wiley. pp 308–309

  30. Goldsmith J, Huck G (1995) Ideology and linguistic theory: Noam Chomsky and the deep structure debates. Routledge, New York, p 132

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gosse E (2009) Father and son a study of two temperaments. Public domain book, New York

  32. Gould SJ (1980) The panda’s thumb: more reflections in natural history. W.W. Norton, New York

  33. Grinker R (1973) Reminiscences of personal contact with Freud. In Ruitenbeck HME (ed) Freud as We Knew Him. Wayne State UP, Detroit, Michigan, pp 181

  34. Gross AG (1990) The rhetoric of science. HarvardUP, Chicago, Illinois

  35. Grossworth P (1992) The idyll in the harz mountains: Freud's secret committee. In: Gelfand T, Kerr J (eds) Freud and the history of psychoanalysis. Analytic Press, New York, pp 347–356

  36. Harris RA (1993) The linguistics wars. Oxford UP, New York

    Google Scholar 

  37. Morrison DE, Henkel RE (1970) The significance test controversy. Aldine Transaction, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hartmann H (1955) Letter to Ernest Jones November 11. In: Roazen P (eds) Freud and His Followers. Alfred A. Knopf, New York

  39. Hogben L (1968) Statistical theory, note 2. Toronto, Canada

  40. Hellman H (1998) Great feuds in science: ten of the liveliest disputes ever. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  41. Huck G, Goldsmith J (2000) Noam Chomsky and the deep structure debates. New horizons in the study of language and mind. New York, p 132

  42. Ibbotson P, Tomasello M (2016) Language in a new key. Sci Am.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Imre Lakatos (2014) In: Steinberg D (ed) Readings in philosophy, linguistics and psychology. W.W. Norton, New York

  44. Farish J (1867) Review of the origin of species. North British Rev 46:277

    Google Scholar 

  45. Fisher R (1957) Statistical methods of scientific research, Oxford UP, NewYork

  46. Jones E (1958) Free associations: a memoir of a psychoanalyst. Routledge, New York, p 106

  47. Jones E (1955a) The life and work of Sigmund Freud, vol 11. Basic Books, New York, p 153

  48. Jones E (1955b) The life and work of Sigmund Freud, vol ll. Basic Books, New York, pp 406–408

  49. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 17, Series B, 74. (1957) pp 59–78

  50. Kardiner A (1997) My analysis with Freud: reminiscences. Norton, New York

  51. Katz J, Fodor J (1963) The structure of semantic theory. Language 29:170–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Lakotos I, Musgrave A (eds) (1970) Criticism and the growth of knowledge. London, UK, p 133

  53. Livio M (1998) Brilliant blunders: from Darwin to Einstein. Simon and Schuster, New York, pp 50–1

  54. Lonnig WE (2003) Johan Gregor Mendel: Why his discoveries were ignored for 35 years: Some critical comments about the effects of Darwinism on biological research by pioneers of genetics as well as further biologists and historians of biology. Retrieved from:

  55. Maguire W (1974) The Freud/Jung: the correspondence between Sigmund Freud and C. G. Jung. Princeton U.P. 539, New Jersey

  56. Makari G (2008) Revolution in mind: The creation of psychoanalysis. Harper Perennial, New York

  57. Mayr E (1999) One long argument: Charles Darwin and the genesis of modern evolutionary thought. Harvard UP, Cambridge Massachusetts

  58. McGuire JE, Krips H, Melia T (eds) (1994) Science reason and rhetoric. University of Pittsburgh press, Pittsburgh

  59. Neisser U (1967) Cognitive psychology. Routledge, New York

  60. Neyman J, Fisher RA (1957) An appreciation. Science 156:1458

  61. Nola R (2008) Social studies of science. In: The routledge companion to philosophy of science. p 259

  62. Palmer FR (1981) Semantics. Cambridge UP, New York

    Google Scholar 

  63. Paul D, Stoley PD (1991) When genius errs R. A. Fisher and the lung cancer controversy. Am J Epidemiol 133(5):422

    Google Scholar 

  64. Phillips A (1994) On flirtation. Harvard UP, New York

  65. Pinker S (1999) Words and Rules. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  66. Planck M (1949) Scientific autobiography and other papers, trans. into English by F. Gayner. New

  67. Polanyi M (1966) The tacit dimension. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  68. Porter TM (1986) The rise of statistical thinking 1820–1900. Princeton UP, New Jersey

    Book  Google Scholar 

  69. Prelli JL (1989) A rhetoric of science Inventing Scientific Discourse. University of South Carolina Press, South Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  70. Quine WVO (1985) Epistemology naturalized. In: Kornblith H (ed) Naturalizing Epistemology. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp 15–30

    Google Scholar 

  71. Roazen P (1975a) Freud and his followers. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, p 16

    Google Scholar 

  72. Roazen P (1975b) Freud and his followers. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, p 103

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ross JR (1974) Three batons for cognitive psychology. In: Weimer, WB, and David Palermo (eds) Cognition and the symbolic processes. Weimer, WB, Lawrence, pp 63–124

  74. Sadger I, Dudes A et al (2005) Recollecting Freud. University of Wisconcon Press, Madison, Wisconsin

  75. Science (1992) 45:1206–1210

  76. Sclater A (2003) The extent of Charles Darwin’s knowledge of Mendel. Retrieved at Accessed 17 Dec 2015

  77. Silberschatz G (2015) Improving the yield of psychotherapy research. Psychother Res

  78. See: Weimer WB (1979) Notes on the methodology of scientific research. Guilford Press, New Jersey

  79. See: Brome V (1968) Freud and his early circle. William Murrow, New York

  80. See: Lakatos I (1970) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A (eds), In Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge UP, Cambridge

  81. Simons HW (1980) Are scientists rhetorers in disguise? Are analyses of discursive processes within scientific communities. In: White EE (ed) Rhetoric in transition: studies in the nature and uses of rhetoric. State College, Pennsylvania State UP, Pennsylvania, pp 115–131

    Google Scholar 

  82. Spence D (1994) The rhetorical voice of psychoanalysis: displacement of evidence by theory. Massachusetts Harvard UP, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  83. Steinberg D, Jakovabitz L (1971) Semantic structures: an interdisciplinary reader. Note 56. Cambridge UP, Cambridge, Massachusetts

  84. Stigler SM (1999) Statistics on the table. Harvard UP, Cambridge, Massachusetts

  85. Sulloway F (1979) Freud: biologist of the mind. BasicBooks, New York

  86. (1996) Ideology and linguistic theory: noam chomsky and the deep structure debates. Routledge, New York, p 82

  87. Trendler G (2009) Measurement theory psychology and the revolution that cannot happen. Theory Psychol.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Turner MB (1965) Philosophy and the science of behavior. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York

    Google Scholar 

  89. Vonzimmer PJ (1958) Darwin and mendel: the historical connection. ISIS, p 1

  90. Weissmann F, Harre R (eds) (1968) How I see philosophy. Macmillan, New York

  91. Ward P, Kirschvinck J (2015) A new history of life; the radical new discoveries about the origins and evolution of life on earth. Bloomsbury Publishing, p 120

    Google Scholar 

  92. Watson RI (2001) R. I. Watson’s selected papers on the history of psychology. Brozek J, Evans R (eds) University of New Hampshire Press, New Hampshire

  93. Watson RI (1968) The great psychologists, Aristotle to Freud. Lippincott, New York

  94. Weber M (1960) An intellectual portrait. Berkeley: Doubleday

  95. Weimer WB (1974) The history of psychology and its retrieval from historiography: I. the problematic nature of history; II. Some lessons for the methodology of scientific research. Sci Stud 4:235, 367–396

  96. Weimer WB (1977) Science as a rhetorical transaction. Philos Rhetor 59:1

  97. Weimer, W.B. Scientific research (1979) Social science studies, 4, 235:367–396

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neil Philip Young.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Walter B. Weimer—Retired at The Pennsylvania State University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Young, N.P., Weimer, W.B. The Constraining Influence of the Revolutionary on the Growth of the Field. Axiomathes (2021).

Download citation


  • Revolutionary
  • Scientific revolutions
  • Growth of science
  • Constraining influences
  • Darwin
  • Freud
  • Chomsky
  • Fischer