I mean, both Scheme and CL have good libraries and a set of standards.
My initial point was about cultures - Haskelites are typically very smart, extremely mathy, and they'd often choose certain ways even if it takes them forever and requires reading and analyzing dozens of academic papers, just because "Galois was a genius and we can make this theory fit here, because then we can center infinite divs on infinitely large DOM entities...", then publishes a paper "Coequalizers for Vertical Alignment: A Comonadic Approach"
A Lisper would be like: "Ahem... I wrapped the whole thing in a macro. Yes, it evals a string. Yes, the string is generated by another macro. No, I will not be explaining it. It shipped Tuesday, it prints money, it works. Gotta go, kids need dinner.."
Also, where do you go from "preferring strong CS theoretical grounds" to "cutting corners"? They don't have to be mutually exclusive.
That garbage collection that Haskell has? Guess where that came from. The whole "functions as data to pass around", guess where that came from. It was those pesky lispers on a Tuesday.
Edit: typo
Da hell you're talking about, friend? I said nothing about "people", or them being smart or dumb; just a difference in cultural stereotypes.
Now you're ironically "proving the point" I didn't make by saying some dumb shit and pulling me into this pit too. If I was actually smarter I'd probably just ignored it. Reminds me Billy Madison quote: "everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Again, check HAKMEM from ITS/Maclisp/PDP10's (The OS from Richard Stallman took all the ideas for GNU Emacs, the GPL license, the free software movemement and whatnot). Lisp itself accounts for tons of papers and innovation.