The first premises form the metaphysical framework for science. In other words, any science that ventures to claim autonomy by drawing the lines can do so only by kicking away its metaphysical structure (the spider web is nothing without the synapse). System building or the art of establishing self-consistency on a limited scale is a great enterprise for many, and if anyone decides to play along, there will soon be a whiz-at-it to ping you on contradictions.
While some are willing to allow contradictions their validity only within a system, other like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Pascal, and Ortega recognized that derivative character of science and system. Have there been any great system builders since Hegel? Not in philosophy; the most optimistic are the positivists in science who are still busy claiming logic for its own designated field. They are able to make this claim (as anyone could) under the happy circumstance of popularity, propaganda and sometimes force. The rest of the world is slowly turning postmodern, and if the prophetic muse strikes, it may suggest to some lone seer that technology will hit the rocks. Science cannot last long, even in the face of discoveries, without an archeological or teleological anchor. We are already needing dirty bombs.
Happy hunting.
You, possibly, imagine that such an anchor makes a difference to science. I rather think of it as a coordinate system. One is easily substituted for another without changing the relative positions of the points.
In other words, the spider web still looks like a spider web, no matter what the draglines are anchored to.