galloping away with the analogy (eat my dust, Gish)
You go downtown and get a permit to build a house then you build a 4 floor apt building and see what the building inspector says.
Except that the building inspector never says anything. No one ever sees this person. He may not even exist.
What happens is that you build your four-floor apartment building and call it a house. Some of your neighbours agree that it's a house, some disagree. Among those who disagree, some call your structure an apartment building, some call it a condo, some a complex, some a low-rise, some an eyesore, some an architectural wonder. Some call it other terms.
These people use different personal criteria for arriving at the terms they do. Most of these people admit that their criteria are, in fact, personal. They know these buildings are what they are, regardless of what we call them. But some individuals claim their terms for these buildings are infallible. They say they possess the Only True Building Criteria, given uniquely to them from the building inspector.
The problem for them is that they cannot produce this building inspector. He is never seen and he never shows up to resolve the debate. In the meantime, the people who claim to have seen him disagree among themselves and quarrel more fiercely over terms than anyone else. For all the grandiosity of their claims, they show no sign of having spoken with a single source at all.
In the meantime, you still have buildings that house things. Same number of bricks.