---
name: humanities-research
description: "Specialized research workflow for humanities, philosophy, social sciences, and arts — interpretive methods, primary source analysis, theoretical frameworks, bilingual academic writing."
version: 1.0.0
author: Hermes Agent
license: MIT
platforms: [linux, macos, windows]
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [Humanities, Philosophy, Social Science, Art, Interpretive, Primary Sources, Theory, Bilingual]
    category: research
    related_skills: [openalex, academic-writing, arxiv]
    requires_toolsets: [terminal, web]
---

# Humanities Research — Interpretive & Cross-Disciplinary

Specialized research workflow for philosophy, art history, cultural studies, social theory, and other humanities disciplines. Complements `openalex` (literature search) and `academic-writing` (general structure).

## When To Use

- Research involves interpretation, theory application, or close reading
- Primary sources (texts, artworks, historical documents) are central
- Writing requires engagement with philosophical traditions or theoretical frameworks
- Work crosses between Chinese and Western academic traditions
- Paper is argumentative/interpretive rather than purely empirical

## Research Workflow

```
Phase 1: Source Identification
  → Define primary sources (texts, artworks, archives)
  → Define secondary literature (scholarly commentary)
  → Identify relevant theoretical frameworks

Phase 2: Source Analysis
  → Close reading / formal analysis of primary sources
  → Map secondary literature by interpretive camp/approach
  → Identify debates and disagreements in the field

Phase 3: Thesis Development
  → Socratic questions: what does existing interpretation miss?
  → Formulate original interpretive claim
  → Identify counter-arguments and address them

Phase 4: Writing
  → Apply appropriate structure (interpretive essay, theoretical application, comparative)
  → Integrate primary evidence with theoretical framing
  → Write in appropriate register (Chinese academic or English academic)

Phase 5: Quality Assurance
  → Anti-hallucination: no invented citations or misrepresented arguments
  → Coherence: does the argument hold together?
  → Evidence: does every interpretive claim connect to specific textual/artistic evidence?
```

## Primary Source Analysis Methods

### Close Reading (Literary/Philosophical Texts)

For each primary text:
1. **What does the text literally say?** (paraphrase)
2. **What is the underlying argument structure?** (premises → conclusion)
3. **What key terms are contested or ambiguous?** (definition check)
4. **What does the text NOT say? What are its blind spots?**
5. **What is the historical/philosophical context?**
6. **How have interpreters disagreed about this text?**

### Formal Analysis (Artworks/Visual Sources)

1. **Formal elements**: composition, color, line, texture, scale
2. **Iconography**: identifiable symbols, motifs, references
3. **Context**: when/where made, patron, intended audience
4. **Tradition**: what does this work draw from / react against?
5. **Interpretation**: what does this work mean, and what evidence supports that?

### Archival / Documentary Sources

1. **Provenance**: where did this document come from?
2. **Genre**: letter, diary, official record, journalistic account?
3. **Bias**: whose perspective is represented? What's omitted?
4. **Corroboration**: does other evidence support or contradict?

## Theoretical Frameworks (Quick Reference)

### Western Philosophy

| Framework | Key Thinkers | Useful For |
|-----------|-------------|-----------|
| Phenomenology | Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Pony | Perception, embodiment, lived experience |
| Hermeneutics | Gadamer, Ricoeur | Interpretation, text meaning, dialogue |
| Structuralism | Saussure, Lévi-Strauss | Deep structures, signs, cultural systems |
| Post-structuralism | Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze | Power, discourse, deconstruction |
| Critical Theory | Frankfurt School, Habermas | Ideology, culture, emancipation |
| Pragmatism | Dewey, James, Rorty | Practice, truth as useful |
| Analytical Philosophy | Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein | Logic, language, meaning |
| Philosophy of Mind | Dennett, Chalmers, Searle | Consciousness, intentionality |

### Chinese Philosophical Traditions

| Framework | Core Text/Thinkers | Useful For |
|-----------|-------------------|-----------|
| Confucianism | Analerta, Mencius | Ethics, social relations, ritual |
| Daoism | Daodejing, Zhuangzi | Nature, wu wei, paradox |
| Buddhist Philosophy | Madhyamaka, Chan | Emptiness, interdependence |
| Neo-Confucianism | Zhu Xi, Wang Yangming | Mind, principle, investigation |

### Critical / Cultural Theory

| Framework | Key Thinkers | Useful For |
|-----------|-------------|-----------|
| Marxism | Marx, Gramsci, Althusser | Political economy, ideology |
| Feminism | Butler, Haraway, Spivak | Gender, power, intersectionality |
| Postcolonialism | Said, Bhabha, Spivak | Empire, representation, subaltern |
| Queer Theory | Sedgwick, Halperin | Identity, performativity |
| Media Studies | McLuhan, Postman | Technology, mediation |

## Source Databases by Subfield

### Philosophy
| Source | URL | Notes |
|--------|-----|-------|
| PhilPapers | philpapers.org | Comprehensive philosophy DB |
| OpenAlex (domain D2) | api.openalex.org | All philosophy papers |
| JSTOR | jstor.org | Historical philosophy |
| Google Scholar | scholar.google.com | Supplemental |

### Art History / Visual Studies
| Source | URL | Notes |
|--------|-----|-------|
| Getty Vocabularies | getty.edu/research/tools | ULAN, AAT, TGN |
| JSTOR Art History | jstor.org | Illustrated articles |
| OpenAlex (domain D3) | api.openalex.org | Cross-disciplinary art papers |
| Smithsonian Archives | archives.si.edu | Primary sources |

### Social Sciences
| Source | URL | Notes |
|--------|-----|-------|
| OpenAlex (domain D1) | api.openalex.org | Main resource |
| Google Scholar | scholar.google.com | CN literature |
| Sociological Abstracts | probesw.com | Sociology |
| AnthroSource | anthrosource.net | Anthropology |

### Chinese Academic Sources (人文社科)
| Source | URL | Notes |
|--------|-----|-------|
| CNKI 知网 | cnki.net | Main CN academic DB, use browser |
| NCPSSD 国家哲社文献中心 | ncpssd.cn | Philosophy/social science |
| 万方 | wanfangdata.com.cn | Alternative CN DB |
|装的 | zhanlve.org | Academic journals |

## Literature Review for Interpretive Work

### Don't Do: Source-By-Source Summary
```
❌ "Zhang (2020) argues X. Li (2019) argues Y. Wang (2018) argues Z."
```

### Do: Thematic/Debate Organization
```
✓ "Interpretations of this phenomenon divide into three camps:
   (1) those who emphasize X (Zhang 2020, Li 2019)...
   (2) those who prioritize Y (Wang 2018)...
   (3) a third position that synthesizes X and Y (Chen 2021)...
   This paper advances a fourth position..."
```

### Cross-Reference Method
- Map which sources cite or respond to each other
- Identify the "conversation" in the field
- Position your argument within that conversation

## Bilingual Terminology Management

Chinese academic writing in Western contexts requires careful terminology:

### Strategy
1. First occurrence: Chinese term + English translation in parentheses
2. If no good English equivalent: keep Chinese, explain in context
3. Maintain a terminology sheet for consistency

### Example
```
海德格尔的"此在"(Dasein)概念...
德勤塔的"延异"(différance)概念...
```

### Common Pitfalls
- Don't translate philosophical terms literally without checking established conventions
- Don't mix translation strategies mid-paper
- Chinese academic Chinese differs from vernacular Chinese — maintain formal register

## Anti-Hallucination for Humanities

Humanities citations are particularly easy to fabricate. Enforce strictly:

### Verification Checklist
- [ ] Exact author name (Chinese: family name first, then given name)
- [ ] Exact title (in original language + translation if quoting)
- [ ] Publication year
- [ ] Page number for direct quotes
- [ ] Chapter/section for indirect references
- [ ] Check that the cited source actually contains the argument you're attributing to it

### Red Flags in Drafts
- `有学者指出` without a specific citation → demand name + source
- `研究表明` without data source → demand specific study
- Translated English quote with no original → find and verify original
- Paraphrased Chinese term without source → check established translation

## Writing Structure: Interpretive Essay

```
1. Introduction
   - Opening: specific interpretive puzzle/tension (not broad topic)
   - Thesis: one-sentence interpretive claim
   - Roadmap: how the argument proceeds

2. Theoretical Framing
   - Introduce relevant framework(s)
   - Explain how it will be applied
   - Do NOT try to cover the entire theory

3. Primary Source Analysis
   - Close reading / formal analysis with specific examples
   - Integrate theoretical concepts into analysis (not separate sections)
   - Use textual/artistic evidence for every interpretive claim

4. Discussion
   - Broader implications of the interpretation
   - How this challenges/extends existing scholarship
   - Limitations: what doesn't this interpretation capture?

5. Conclusion
   - Restate thesis in broader context
   - No new evidence or arguments
   - Open questions for future scholarship
```

## Engineering + Humanities Crossover

For work combining technical and humanistic approaches (e.g., AI art, digital humanities):

```
1. Define the interdisciplinary gap:
   "Technical X offers Y, but current humanistic scholarship ignores/不理解..."
   
2. Bridge explicitly:
   "This paper brings [technical method] into dialogue with [humanistic tradition]"

3. Structure for dual audience:
   - Articulate humanistic contribution first (make it accessible)
   - Then show how technical work enables new humanistic insight
   - Or: show how humanistic theory reframes how we understand technical work

4. Common mistake to avoid:
   - Don't just describe both; show their synthesis
   - Reviewer from each field should learn something from the other
```

## Quality Gates for Humanities Writing

| Check | Standard |
|-------|----------|
| Argument | One clear thesis stated in intro, defended throughout |
| Evidence | Every interpretive claim linked to specific source/example |
| Theory | Framework applied, not just mentioned |
| Sources | No vague citations; all claims attributed |
| Coherence | Each paragraph advances the argument |
| Register | Consistent formal academic tone throughout |