The reference to Lumper and Splitter in the humanities was published in 1975 during a debate between J. H. Hexter and Christopher Hill in the Times Literary Supplement. This was followed by Hexter`s detailed critique of Hill`s book Change and Continuity in Seventeenth Century England, in which Hill developed Max Weber`s argument that the rise of capitalism was facilitated by Calvinist Puritanism. Hexter opposed the “dismantling” of Hill`s sources to find evidence that supported his theories. Hexter argued that Hill made citations of sources in a way that distorted his meaning. Hexter explained this as a mental habit he called “motte.” According to him, “Lumper” refused the differences and chose to highlight similarities. Any evidence that did not match their arguments was ignored as aberrant. In contrast, the splinters highlighted the differences and resisted simple patterns. While Lumper was constantly trying to create consistent patterns, the splinters favored incoherent complexity.  In history, Lumpers are those who tend to establish broad definitions covering major periods and disciplines, while fragments of interrelationships want to assign names.
The clod tends to create an increasingly unwieldy definition, with the limbs having less and less in common. This can lead to definitions that are little more than conventions or groups that combine fundamentally different examples. Splitting often leads to “indiscriminate differences,” artistic and picky categories, and a failure to recognize underlying similarities. Software engineering often involves the creation of models (sometimes called motor-driven architecture). A Lumper is interested in generalization and creates models with a small number of broadly defined objects. A sparkle hesitates to generalize and creates models with a large number of well-defined objects. The conversion between the two styles is not necessarily symmetrical. For example, if the error messages behave in the same way in two well-defined classes, the classes can be easily combined. However, if some messages behave differently in a large class, each object in the class must be examined before it can divide the class. This illustrates the principle that “cracks can be put in the same pot more easily than lumps can be divided.”  Thus, Lumper could see “stress,” where flashes (say) could identify worries, grief, or some sort of anxiety disorder. Physicist and philosophy author Freeman Dyson suggested that “observers of the philosophical scene” are crudely, though too simple, divided into fragments and rags – which roughly corresponds to materialists (who imagine the world divided into atoms) and Platonists (who see the world as composed of ideas). “Splinters” and “Lumper” have fundamentally different approaches to psychiatric diagnosis and classification. . . .