To Human Science, or to Socially Science - is there a difference?

This past month (February 2021) our group has powered through the knowledge framework for what the IBO designates as Group 3 subjects, i.e., the Human Sciences. Our focus has been multifold, and now, almost four weeks out, and nearing our goal for the given unit, I must admit, in the most Socratic of ways, that I am left with more questions than potentially answers. Let me share a few -

Though a compelling conceptual shift (emphasis on subject - human, rather than entity - society), what is the foundational difference between human and social sciences, respectively? Is it a mere term change?

The idea  of collaboration - in the most immediate of Latourian ways - how sustainable is it if the human sciences are fundamentally dependent on real-world experiments? 

The role of facts - how much can we ascribe to context, when it comes of fixing the gaps in terms of underrepresented perspectives? 

In no shape or form do I suggest to have definitive answers to these questions, but what I can currently offer is the following. Namely, although it may appear to the naked eye that the cultural and linguistic change of terms - from social to human - is just that, a contemporary shift of nomenclature, its aftermath (or for that matter, effect and impact) has been lasting and significant. It has not only allowed for a more nuanced understanding of scope and sequence of otherwise marginalized disciplines (neuroscience), advocating for the largest meaningful push towards purposeful interdisciplinary integration. At the same time, the move towards focusing on the key connecting tissue - the human at the center - has been equally difficult to ignore, in a post-industrialist context, as we scramble for resources, while advocating for equity in access to the same. Needless to say, the change is here to stay.