Traditional reasoning has boxed science as micro-level thinkers applying reason with keen attention to detail. And humanities as those with a macro-level approach to a problem.
While mostly agreeable, this may be a flawed categorization of streams and thinking.
Humanities/ Social sciences
The core tenet of this stream is exploring the social structure with a keen eye to understand the symptoms across multiple data points. More generalizations may have to be applied to arrive at a macro-level solution that produces an outcome. Although some of these are macro-level generalizations, a successful program requires the validation of biases and variables for success. This requires a micro-level analysis of implementations and success. A structure not just to create a program may be required but building a project exception within this structure has to be accommodated for the resounding success of an initiative in social sciences.
Sciences
Experimentally validating assumptions and variables for practicality is at the heart of science programs. This automatically ensures attention to detail. Attention to detail sometimes works as a fence against macro-level thinking. You could break this barrier by trying to accept what’s beyond the fences and look for scale from a scientific perspective, accepting unknowns and undefined variables that could be explored later. Try not to make perfection the enemy of success.
Thinking creatively within reason does sound a bit counterintuitive. But don’t be alarmed. Your creativity will not be curtailed but validated. For successful implementation of programs, this thinking maybe an essential ingredient.