Chaos Theory of Axioms

I was writing the other day about how strange it is when you start out from slightly different axioms you may end up with entirely different theories, ethical philosophies etc...a sort of "chaos theory of axioms", for a sensitive dependence on the initial axiom

A guy on edge.org writes (and I love the clarity);
"...What we discovered was fascinating: Each major philosopher seems to take a small number of metaphors as eternal and self-evident truths and then, with rigorous logic and total systematicity, follows out the entailments of those metaphors to their conclusions wherever they lead. They lead to some pretty strange places. Plato's metaphors entail that philosophers should govern the state. Aristotle's metaphors entail that there are four causes and that there cannot be a vacuum. Descartes' metaphors entail that the mind is completely disembodied and that all thought is conscious. Kant's metaphors lead to the conclusions that there is a universal reason and that it dictates universal moral laws. These and other positions taken by those philosophers are not random opinions. They are consequences of taking commonplace metaphors as truths and systematically working out the consequences"