I have read one of Clarence's Bass's later books. He tackled this apparent paradox. I think he had it right. The problem isn't that there are contradictions, it is that the theories are overly simplistic. Every one of these training theories takes a single idea, discovers it holds merit and then goes hog wild applying it like it was the only idea. Clarence made another psuedo-scientific discovery. He noted that in two apparently opposed camps, there were some really big dudes. So both styles were working. You can over think this stuff. And we are talking about optimization. So they all get results but arguably one works 3% better then the next, for some people, sometimes. So I still read them all, try everything out, and keep what I like. But getting religious about a training approach is just small minded.
Lifting weights requires one to overcome gravity. It is me against the planet!