Precision Hierarchies: An Epistemological Reflection on the "Standard Dilemma" in the Humanities and Social Sciences

This paper proposes a three-layer precision hierarchy framework (high-precision/replicable, medium-precision/practical outcomes, low-precision/directional validity) to resolve the long-standing "standard dilemma" in the humanities and social sciences. It provides operational decision-tree rules for researchers to position their own work, introduces "auditability annotation" as a substitute for impossible quantification in interpretive research, and demonstrates the framework's diagnostic power through cases including the reproducibility crisis, the "involution" concept misuse, and the contrasting migration outcomes of behavioral economics "nudge" (successful) versus social psychology "ego depletion" (failed). The framework offers a unified epistemological foundation for pluralistic evaluation standards across disciplines.