Allow me to digress with a personal reminiscence. I occasionally publish a paper in that branch of philosophy that is now called phenomenology. After publishing my first paper in this subject, I felt deeply hurt when, at a meeting of the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy, I was rudely told in no uncertain terms that everything I wrote in my paper was well known. The same vignette was repeated more than once, and I was eventually forced to reconsider my publishing standards in phenomenology. It so happens that the fundamental treatises of phenomenology are written in thick, heavy philosophical German.
Tradition demands that no examples ever be given of what one is talking about.
One day I decided, not without some serious misgivings, to publish a paper that was essentially an updating of some paragraphs from a book by Edmund Husserl, with a couple of examples added. While I was waiting for the worst at the next meeting of the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy, a prominent phenomenologist rushed towards me with a big smile on his face. He was full of praise for my paper, and he strongly encouraged me to further develop the novel and original ideas presented in it. Every mathematician has only a few tricks. A long time ago, an older and well known number theorist made some disparaging remarks on Paul Erdos's work.