Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

The article for today, “Developing Things: Notes toward an Epistemology of Building in the Digital Humanities”, was extremely interesting to me. It is discussed whether or not digital humanities is considered “scholarship” or not which I went back and forth on myself throughout reading. At first, I thought it should of course be considered scholarship because of the level of skill and complication that goes into digital work, but the middle of the article changed my mind a bit, saying “Repairing cars requires a high level of technical skill; the intellectual nature of chess is beyond dispute; mining coal is backbreaking work. No one confuses these activities with scholarship.” This is very true, and sets up a possible thought in my head that the digital work should not at all be discredited for its difficulty or impressiveness, but it may just not fall under the category of “scholarship”. However, the internet defines the word scholarship with “academic study or achievement; learning of a high level”, which makes me think it should be able to fall under that category. I went back and forth a few times, and still am unsure what my opinion is, but I would like to read more on arguments about this question.

I thought it was interesting that fellow classmate “TB” noted that “it just seems that whatever point they are arguing has little effect on what the results of any research would be”. I agree with this and lack the knowledge of why this question is so relevant, if it does not affect any of the data or analysis in these works.