Today's typical formulation of the Erklären/Verstehen differential rests on a stylized conceptual dichotomy preserved, for example, in the idea of the two cultures, or in Windelband's classic distinction between nomothetic and ideographic sciences (those based on generalized laws, and those exploring a single case in depth, with knowledge based on empirical evidence treated inductively or deductively). It is commonplace to follow Windelband and to differentiate among the sciences and set them over and against historical or historicized understandings (Erfahrungswissenschaften).¹ This practice projects the sciences as if they were complementary rationalities, each a formalized paradigm with its own distinct analytics and field of data.