Archive for September, 2016
We’re all on the spectrum
Ramsy takes a restrictive approach to digital humanities. With his essay “Who’s In and Who’s Out”, he states the in order to be a digital humanist you need to be able to code. I find this notion confusing. I you have an idea on why type of program you need in order to do your […]
Sketching the DH Spectrum
If we imagine DH as a spectrum, there are certainly a few categories that would stand out, and we see these categories present themselves again and again, often implicit, in the definition arguments of various digital humanists. Let’s try and sketch them out: Builders/Programmers: In this area of DH, the focus is on constructing digital […]
The Spectrum of Digital Humanities
If I were to imagine the spectrum of digital humanities, I would have three main categories. On one end of the spectrum, I would put what some scholars call the “thinker.” On the right I would have the people are “building things” as Stephen Ramsay puts it, and in the middle of the spectrum I […]
Spectrum of DH
If we were to sort the Digital Humanities into a spectrum based on Mullen’s definition of DH: Category One would involve the people whose focus is on using digital tools to research the humanities in a new way. This is the most obvious use of Digital Humanities and perhaps it holds the origins of DH. […]
Mullen & Sample: DH Spectrum
The spectrum Mullen proposes seems problematic. I just have too many questions. For the sake of the blog post, I’ll do my darnedest to make one up, but let me pontificate for just a brief moment: What does a non digital humanist look like? Mullen says, “working as a digital humanist is not one side of a binary, […]
Mullen’s Spectrum
Mullen’s spectrum is an outline of who fits where on the line of how much digital humanities they use in their work. The spectrum is a grid that shows the level of competence toward the digital humanities. Going from category one to category ten, with each of them being on the extreme ends and category […]
Mullen / Sample Prompt: 9/26
For class today, we surveyed a number of blog posts, all of which date from 2010-2011 and all of which respond to key controversies facing digital humanities scholarship. In Lincoln Mullen’s “We’re All Digital Humanists Now,” for example, Mullen argues for an inclusive definition of DH, viewing digital humanities scholarship as a “spectrum” of activity, […]
Terras Blog responce
Terras points out the fact how the computer science and the “pure” humanities need to work together to create better projects in the digital humanities. With the dismissal of computer scientists when developing applications in the digital humanities, programs can become highly inefficient. From Terras’s essay the digital humans seem to deal with text a […]
Response to Terra
One of the main differences that can be seen between Terra’s essay and the other authors that we have read so far this semester is her use of numbers and visual representations. When discussing the ACH/ALLC 2005 conference, she uses graphs and spreadsheets to present her findings. From what I know about engineers, they need […]
Terras Response
In Melissa Terras’ essay, “Disciplined: Using Educational Studies to Analyse ‘Humanities Computing’”, the author provides an assessment based on findings drawn from her interviews within the Digital Humanities community and the number of presenters at the ACH/ALLC Conference, in addition to other supplemental research on how ‘Humanities Computing’ is viewed as a ‘discipline’ and how […]
