I wonder if this is true when applied to kata based learning, where the form concretely embodies the concepts and requires interpretation by the student. With this in mind, there might be less of a gap between the founder lecturing and the founder showing a technique.
I have long considered kata to be a form of physical "case" learning. As I went through law school and began to practically use and extend the principle of case-learning and application in legal practice, I have increasingly seen the kihon waza in just this way -- even down to the adversary structure of the event of conflict described with the outcome well-understood.
What I can say of a legal case I can say of any kihon waza or kata -- The case is not the real lawsuit -- it is the record of what somebody thought was important about that lawsuit. There is much that was missed that seemed perhaps even more important to the parties at the time, but was not ultimately deemed noteworthy, or determinative by the person who recorded the form of the engagement.