Research in the social sciences and humanities faces many challenges in the Global South. One of the most prominent challenges lies in the debate over the approach of “deconstructing colonial knowledge” (Edward Said, Ghatari Spivak and Saba Mahmoud) over the theoretical frameworks used by researchers in the Global South. Despite the predominance of these debates in the Global South, they are nothing other than an echo of Eurocentric academia debates. Consequently, obscuring the possibilities of South-South dialogue on the problems facing knowledge production in their countries. Although it is not possible to talk about a single structure of knowledge that we can attribute to knowledge production in the Global South, many of these countries share a similar predicament when it comes to humanities and social sciences (HSS), to name some of these challenges: the constant question of relevance to social reality; Another challenge is the obsession with “Intellectual Independence,” whereby every attempt to think “philosophically” challenged by a question about the originality of thought. One way this problem manifests itself is in the question of knowledge categorization. I argue in this paper that the term “Arabic Thought” has been used as a vacuum category, where all knowledge that does not fall under predetermined fields of knowledge is stored in. Similarly, it’s used to make them a subject of study, which imposes the idea that they cannot be part of cumulative knowledge and deals with them as raw material, providing the substance for producing “real” knowledge. I also argue that bridging South-South thought can substitute a body of knowledge with shared concerns. However, I do not aim for a “comparative philosophy” approach where each intellectual product risks the collapse into Culture. While doing so, I question the need for “normativity” to produce knowledge, asking what substitutes a “legitimate field of knowledge.” My paper will be structured in the following way: I start with an inquiry into the term categorization because the current categorization of knowledge into regions of the Global South (i.e., Arabic thought, Indian thought, etc.) hinders links to be made between shared experiences of societies; therefore a new categorization using common themes is necessary. Then I provide a short essay on the history of knowledge to emphasize the historicity of knowledge production. Finally, this paper’s primary approach will draw a line between Arabic thought and the knowledge produced in the Global South using different theorization attempts of “intellectual independence.”