6 - On Collaboration between the Humanities and the Social Sciences: Discussion of the Terms of Intra and Interdisciplinary Dialogue through the Lenses of Sociology

Abdoulaye Niang · CODESRIA Bulletin · 2021 · sociology · 10.57054/cb03-042016290 · record niang2021-6-on-collaboration-between-the-hum
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית
Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (pdftext); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. Claim relations is empty by design: the essay cites many named authors (Durkheim, Weber, Bourdieu, Morin, Wittgenstein, Zolberg, Nga Ndongo, Corcuff) but never states a relation between its own claim and a specific named prior work — the citations are illustrative or expository, and rule 7 forbids inferring a relation from a bare citation. The nearest candidates (adopting Morin's 'policing epistemology' critique, endorsing Nga Ndongo's 'epistemological refounding') appear inside rhetorical questions or descriptive passages, not as self-positioning statements. The piece is a conceptual/argumentative essay with no data; 'review' is the closest available method value, supported by the article's own self-description. Note the extraction glues footnote markers to words (e.g. 'STEM2', 'much17', 'scientists18'), so quotes preserve those digits verbatim. 2026-08-14 and 2026-08-15 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node. 2026-08-20, the project: TITLE-CONTAINMENT EXPLAINED, AND TWO FURTHER OBSERVATIONS THAT ARE SHIR'S TO RULE ON. (1) The record's title begins "6 - ", a TABLE-OF-CONTENTS CHAPTER NUMBER that is not part of the title and does not occur in the body; the body's own heading is "On Collaboration between the Humanities and the Social Sciences: Discussion of the Terms of Intra and Interdisciplinary Dialogue through the Lenses of Sociology", at character 43. That prefix will defeat every future title test the same way. NOT CHANGED - it is a published title string. (2) THE YEAR LOOKS WRONG. The record says 2021; the body's running head says "CODESRIA Bulletin, Nos 3 & 4, 2016", the DOI is 10.57054/cb03-042016290 which encodes 04-2016, '2016' occurs 7 times in the body and '2021' occurs ZERO times. NOT CHANGED - 'year' is a published field and appears in every citation of this record. (3) The last 120 characters of the staged body are the TITLE AND AUTHOR OF THE NEXT ARTICLE in the same bulletin ("The National Council for Higher Education... A.B.K. Kasozi"), beginning at 99.7% of the file, immediately after this article's reference list ends. CHECKED: 0 of the record's 44 live quotes fall inside it, so no tag is grounded in the neighbouring article. (Recorded for an internal tool: this is a documented title-containment case, not an unread one.)
This record’s own method is review, and the tags below follow from that. A review’s findings, quantities and statistics are things stated IN this paper, and some of them report results obtained elsewhere. No tag on this page names a different author. Measured across every review in this corpus, 81% of a review’s tags carry no citation at all — most of them are the review speaking. The corpus does not adjudicate the rest: read an unmarked tag as a claim this paper makes, not necessarily one it made first.
How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 6 concept tags on this paper, all 6 are grounded in a quoted sentence.
methodenstreit methodology dispute inter-disciplinarity intra-disciplinary hyper-specialisation disciplinary frontiers a new discipline seeking recognition models itself on the already-legitimate hard sciences and simultaneously demarcates itself from the humanities, so the split is produced by the pursuit of institutional legitimacy rather than by the objects studied internal specialisation that is not accompanied by maintained exchange and dialogue turns into disjunction and research seal-off, which defeats the deeper knowledge of humans and society that the specialisation was meant to serve STEM policy sciences review

Legend

relation to other workclaim_relationshow this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim typeclaim_typethe shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edgeconcept_edgesan asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
conceptconceptsan idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tagcontent_tagsa finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
limitationlimitationswhat the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanismmechanismshow the reported effect is said to come about
methodmethodhow the paper produced its evidence
phenomenonphenomenonthe effect or regularity under study
sensesensesa distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it
transfertransfersa method or concept carried in from another field

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.57054/cb03-042016290. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

claim_relations 3 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 2 · concepts 6 · content_tags 13 · limitations 4 · mechanisms 2 · method 1 · phenomenon 1 · senses 3 · transfers 1

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 2 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.

facettagfieldconf.whose words
claim_typecritique
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
claim_typethe paper's words
phenomenondisciplinary boundaries between the social sciences and the humanities
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
phenomenonthe paper's words
methodreview
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
also in: review
methodthe paper's words
mechanismsmechanisms
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
mechanisms[0]the tagger's words
mechanismsmechanisms
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
mechanisms[1]the tagger's words
limitationsThe author limits the scope of the argument: it does not claim to abolish all disciplinary distinctions, only their essentialisation.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
limitations[0]the tagger's words
limitationsThe boundary the paper is about is explained by a bid for institutional standing rather than by any difference in what the two groups of disciplines study.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
what this limits: the distinction between the social sciences and the humanities as used here: the paper states the social sciences struggled to maintain it in order to gain institutional and social recognition, which is a claim about standing rather than about subject matter
limitations[1]1.0the tagger's words
limitationsThe proposed remedy is illustrated from the author's own department and teaching rather than from evidence gathered for the purpose.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
what this limits: the recommendation for interdisciplinary teaching made here: the support offered is the author's own experience of putting teachers of different profile in the same class within their own university department
limitations[2]1.0the tagger's words
limitationsThe claim that scientific definitions are arbitrary reaches the reader through a textbook rather than from the source it is attributed to.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
what this limits: the attribution of the arbitrariness of definitions to Poincare: the paper reports it as recalled by Grawitz, a secondary source, with a page reference to that work rather than to the original
limitations[3]1.0the tagger's words
transfersthe metaphor of a net of a given mesh laid over a stained surface is taken over and developed into the paper's own model of how each discipline's theoretical production captures reality partially and differently
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
transfers[0]the tagger's words
conceptsmethodenstreit
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[0]the paper's words
conceptsmethodology dispute
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[1]the paper's words
conceptsinter-disciplinarity
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[2]the paper's words
conceptsintra-disciplinary
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[3]the paper's words
conceptshyper-specialisation
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[4]the paper's words
conceptsdisciplinary frontiers
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
concepts[5]the paper's words
sensesthe humanities / social-sciences distinction - AS AN INSTITUTIONAL WALL: the paper's own word for the boundary is a wall, called illusory and pauperising, erected in the course of seeking recognition and not derived from a difference in object
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
senses[0]1.0the tagger's words
sensesmethodenstreit - THE METHODOLOGY DISPUTE UNDER ITS GERMAN NAME: the paper glosses the two in one parenthesis and then traces the same dispute across a century, from Germany in the 1870s to Chicago and Columbia between the wars, saying it never ceased completely
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
senses[1]1.0the tagger's words
sensesinterdisciplinarity - AT TWO SCOPES THE PAPER KEEPS APART: intra-disciplinary connections first within the social sciences, and inter-disciplinary connections between them and the humanities, so a single word for both would lose the distinction the argument turns on
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
senses[2]1.0the tagger's words
claim_relationsqualifies → Simon (2008) on methodological naturalism
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
differs in: WHY THE DISCIPLINE NEEDED A METHOD AT ALL. The founding requirement is described as institutional rather than epistemic: the French School 'Quotation withheld', which is a condition of BEING a science rather than a finding about its subject. The paper then defends the resulting methodological naturalism as 'TOO OFTEN CRITICISED ... and frankly too hastily too', so it disputes the criticism while accepting the account of the motive
claim_relations[0]0.9the tagger's words
claim_relationsbuilds-on → Tschannen (2004), Simon (2008)
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
differs in: WHETHER THE DISTINCTION IS IN THE OBJECT OR IN THE STANCE. 'Quotation withheld trying HOWEVER to appear as “a special viewpoint”' - the territory is conceded and the distinctiveness is relocated to a way of looking. A boundary that cannot be drawn around the subject matter is drawn around the perspective instead
claim_relations[1]0.9the tagger's words
claim_relationsbuilds-on → Morin (1994) on hyper-complexity, Boudon (1984)
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
differs in: WHAT FOLLOWS FROM THE LIMITS OF KNOWLEDGE. 'HYPER-COMPLEXITY' and 'this frailty of human knowledge' are cited as grounds for 'more humility and openness especially toward the humanities, an attitude running contrary to the “facesaving pride” ... THAT HAS PREVAILED in most recognised sociology and social sciences'. The same premise that usually licenses methodological retrenchment is used here to argue for opening the boundary
claim_relations[2]0.85the tagger's words
concept_edgesmethodology dispute —same-as→ methodenstreit
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
strength of the relation: 1
concept_edges[0]the tagger's words
concept_edgesintra-disciplinary —distinct-from→ inter-disciplinarity
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span names intra- and inter-disciplinary connections side by side; distinct-from is loose, endpoint variant.
concept_edges[1]the tagger's words
content_tagsFrom the nineteenth century the social sciences struggled to maintain the distinction to gain institutional and social recognition.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[0]the tagger's words
content_tagsThe scientist and pragmatist impulse gave the social sciences a solid epistemological, theoretical and methodological base but simultaneously essentialised the concept of science and narrowed it.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[1]the tagger's words
content_tagsNineteenth-century sociography - social surveys and statistical handbooks - supplied nascent sociology with its data-collection instruments: the questionnaire, the monograph and observation.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[2]the tagger's words
content_tagsContemporary sociology is strongly marked by internal division into multiple specialisations.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[3]the tagger's words
content_tagsQualitative method was dominant in early German sociology and the Chicago School until the 1930s and then disappeared, pushed out precisely as the social sciences reasserted their claim to be scientific.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[4]the tagger's words
content_tagsThe qualitative approach returned forcefully from the 1980s and now offers considerable prospects for enriching research.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[5]the tagger's words
content_tagsThe German romantic-hermeneutic tradition reversed the demarcation, bringing the social sciences (as sciences of the mind) closer to the humanities rather than to the hard sciences.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[6]the tagger's words
content_tagsIn the American tradition, the Chicago School's promotion of qualitative method served to humanise the social sciences.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[7]the tagger's words
content_tagsThe study of art exposes the symmetric limits of both camps: the social scientist's external gaze is too detached from the work of art, while the humanist's internal gaze does not distance itself enough from it.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[8]the tagger's words
content_tagsDisciplinary dissociation did earn the separate sciences recognition, but its cost was an illusory and impoverishing wall between the social sciences and the humanities.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[9]the tagger's words
content_tagsThe paper's own position is that inter-disciplinary differences of theme, theory and method remain meaningful and even productive so long as they are not treated as essential.
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.findings[10]the tagger's words
content_tagsSTEM
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
also in: STEM
content_tags.definitions[1]the tagger's words
content_tagspolicy sciences
Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.
content_tags.definitions[2]the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.

© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824