This is an insightful comment. I agree that whatever consilience really exists, it is definitely understated by the secondary effects of university logistics or the "institutional epistemology" an ordinary education is designed to impress you with, but I still think Carroll's idea of emergence is the more fundamental idea that we should care about, regardless of whether knowledge is really "unified" in the way that Snow and co. think it is. The idea that you can arrange levels of analysis in a hierarchy of fundamental/simple-to-extrafundamental-but-not-"unreal" is extraordinarily convincing and illuminating to me, although I think you really have to hear it from Carroll in his book The Big Picture rather than me if you want the strongest defense and formulation of it.