The problem that arises when we conceptualize the world is that: we look at and emphasize the similarity between two things, when we actually first distinguish the difference between two things.
This problem means that we (at least some of us) think we can explain reality by similarities, when we actually closed this possibility by basing our conceptualization of the world on difference. It means that such explanations can only rotate around the fundamental difference, since this difference is not a similarity but a difference, comprehending it as either an ambiguity or a paradoxical contradiction.
This fact excludes the possibility to explain the world, instead leaving us with the only possibility to model the world (which, unfortunately, is much less shiny). It means that science have to retreat from its claim of being able to explain the world to a much more humble claim of being able to model (and thus to manipulate) the world. Science have to admit that it is a mere practical approach to regulate the world, thereby retreating from its claim to compete with belief, because it thus can’t be a belief per definition.
This retreat is the kiss of death for cladistics and particle physics, but a welcome to finite mathematics and spatial data systems. The rational world turns from infinity (arithmetic) to finiteness (set theory). Please, send this signal from the top down to the bottom.