A faith tradition, in chapter two's vocabulary, is a choice of axes and a choice of questions — the categories in which it describes reality, and the matters it treats as answerable. So is a science. Physics chooses axes labeled mass, charge and field, and treats as answerable whatever survives measurement. A tradition chooses axes labeled covenant, grace, duty, karma or harmony, and treats as answerable what survives prayer, practice, revelation, and the tested life of a community across generations. Different coordinate systems, laid over one reality — and the space itself ranks none of them. Neutrality among coordinate systems is not tolerance, which is a favor the strong extend to the weak and may withdraw. It is a property of the mathematics, and it cannot be withdrawn.
Does this dissolve every disagreement into perspective? No — and distrust any model that claims so. Traditions make claims that genuinely conflict, about history, duty, and what happens next. What the model says is subtler: the conflicts live in the choice of axes and distinguished questions, not in the substrate — a real dispute, but not the kind logic forces to a winner, any more than the hiker and the geologist must duel over the mountain. What that reframing buys is not small. It is the end of the structural requirement that traditions agree in order to coexist.