MIchael Lee

this paper proposes and substantiates the core concept of‘methodological betrayal’ to reveal the shared internal logical predicament of two systems—scholasticism and scientism—that purport to offer ‘absolute explanations’. Through an internal critique, it argues that when scholastic philosophy employs rational argumentation to justify faith, it effectively elevates the rational method above the supreme status of faith itself. Meanwhile, scientism's claim to ‘fully explain the world’ logically necessitates reliance upon an act of faith prohibited by its own rules, thereby precipitating its own self-destruction. Ultimately, this paper concludes that any system claiming to provide ‘absolute explanations’ cannot logically achieve self-consistency; the true spirit of philosophy lies in a sober recognition of this limitation.

Integration (interaction among parts of an entity) is suggested to be necessary for individuality (contra, Metaphysics and the Origin of Species). A synchronic species is an integrated individual that can evolve as a unified whole; a diachronic lineage is a non-integrated historical entity that cannot evolve. Synchronic species and diachronic lineages are consequently suggested to be ontologically distinct entities, rather than alternative perspectives of the same underlying entity (contra Baum (1998), Syst. Biol. 47, 641–653; de Queiroz (1995), Endless Forms: Species and Speciation, pp. 57–75; Genes, Categories and Species). Species concepts usually refer to either one or the other entity; for instance, the Biological Species Concept refers to synchronic species, whereas the Cladistic Species Concept refers to diachronic lineages. The debate over species concepts has often failed to recognise this distinction, resulting in invalid comparisons between definitions that attempt to delineate fundamentally different entities.