This text explores the role of convention and terminology within the fields of science and philosophy. While science treats precise terminology as a fundamental requirement and a marker of professional competence, philosophy presents a different landscape where schools and individuals often develop their own unique vocabularies. The author argues that terminology is not merely a formal or technical matter but carries implicit metaphysical assumptions that often go unnoticed. Philosophers must navigate a constant tension: they need to respect linguistic conventions to remain intelligible, yet they must also resist them when these conventions embody philosophical premises they do not share. In many cases, convention serves as a substitute for logical systematicity, relying on associations rather than rigorous connections. Ultimately, the text characterizes convention as a potential barrier to fundamental criticality, emphasizing that terminology can sometimes mask a lack of genuine scientific or philosophical depth if used without reflection.