...[D]oesn't it make sense to say that the debates over processes vs objects are in a sense undecidable, or that these determinations depend upon some sort of non-foundational perspectival selections, which need not be mutually exclusive?
Again, it's the process philosopher who sees this as undecidable, precisely because of a metaphysical assumption of what processes are, which we can detect in the use of "vs" in "processes vs objects." For me, it's not undecidable at all, because objects are not beings that are metaphysically present.
But more urgently, a perspectival determination, as far as I can tell, is another kind of foundationalism. It's saying that perspective is more real than what is perceived or perspectivized or whatever.
Thus the phrase "non-foundational perspectival" is akin to "square circle." Or saying "Overmining is the governing view of relationism."