In hydrology, the two somewhat competing modelling philosophies of bottom-up and top-down approaches are the basis of most process-based models. Differing mostly (1) in their respective degree of detail in resolving the modelling domain and (2) in their respective degree of explicitly treating conservation laws, these two philosophies suffer from similar limitations. Nevertheless, a better understanding of their respective basis (i.e. micro-scale vs. macro-scale) as well as their respective short comings bears the potential of identifying the complementary value of the two philosophies for improving our models. In this manuscript we analyse several frequently communicated beliefs and assumptions to identify, discuss and emphasize the functional similarity of the two modelling philosophies. We argue that deficiencies in model applications largely do not depend on the modelling philosophy but rather on the way a model is implemented. Based on the premises that top-down models can be implemented at any desired degree of detail and that any type of model remains to some degree conceptual we argue that a convergence of the two modelling strategies may hold some value for progressing the development of hydrological models.