Why has every people known itself chosen? From inside a coordinate system, that system's categories are simply how the world is carved, and its people stand naturally at the origin. There is no view from everywhere inside the space — every view is a view from some basis — so of course each tradition has found itself at the center. All creatures of one substrate, no two agreeing on the chosen, every one reporting accurately from where it stands: the oldest scandal of comparative religion dissolves into a statement about coordinates. And the world-building future retires the question entirely, because centrality stops being scarce. Chosenness was only ever contested because there was one world to be chosen in.
The détente extends into the basement. No one can prove base reality; worlds are buildable; put the two together and a remarkable treaty becomes available at no cost: I can grant, cheerfully, that I may be living in your God's creation — or your descendants' ancestor simulation, the term being Bostrom's — because you must grant, on identical grounds, that you may be living in mine. And each of us remains free to hold, as faith no measurement will referee, that ours is the tradition at the center. Unfalsifiability, which looked like the model's great concession, turns out to be its peace treaty: precisely because no one can be proven wrong about the basement, everyone can afford to be generous on the ground floor. Call it mutual assured creation — and unlike its cold-war namesake, it costs nothing to maintain and no one is harmed when it is invoked.
Nor is being the center of your own universe a vice; it is the factory setting of the instrument you are reading this with. Every nervous system stages the world in egocentric coordinates; the view from everywhere does not exist in mathematics, in physics, or in your skull — three independent disciplines reporting the same finding. Centeredness is not arrogance. It is architecture. So here is what the model actually ends, stated with care: not religious disagreement, and not bad behavior — what it ends is the structural necessity of the fight: the assumption that traditions must converge on one description in order to share one world. The mathematics says they never needed to; the architecture — Trust Taxonomies at full depth, coherence by composable agreements, the Faith and Tradition Cascade as the adoption path — makes non-convergence workable in practice; and world-building makes it abundant. Whewell's word for knowledge jumping together from independent paths was consilience. It is the right word for peoples doing the same, and it is why the word is on the cover.