3.620 humanists, humanism, and computers (100)

Willard McCarty (MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca)
Sun, 22 Oct 89 19:00:10 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 620. Sunday, 22 Oct 1989.


(1) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 89 23:19 EDT (27 lines)
From: "Sterling Beckwith (York University)" <GUEST4@YUSol>
Subject: RE: 3.610 humanists and computers (72)

(2) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 89 12:50:02 EDT (33 lines)
From: bobh@phoenix.uucp (Robert Hollander)
Subject: Re: 3.610 humanists and computers (72)

(3) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 89 22:27:24 EDT (10 lines)
From: Natalie Maynor <MAYNOR@MSSTATE>
Subject: Re: 3.611 humanists and computers, cont. (165)

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 89 23:19 EDT
From: "Sterling Beckwith (York University)" <GUEST4@YUSol>
Subject: RE: 3.610 humanists and computers (72)

[The following came in the form of a private message, but the issue
it raises I cannot keep to myself. Some of us in the academy are still,
I suspect and hope, inclined to consider such things. Its
consideration seems vital to me. --W.M.]

Dear Willard,

Before the heavyweights rise to your challenge, may I emit a plaintive squeak
of apprehension about some of the remedies that will probably be prescribed?

The prevalent emphasis on teaching "how to use computers for the humanities"
courses seems to me to have obscured a much tougher, but ultimately more
central issue. What computers are and do is linked in important ways to key
ideas and tendencies in the whole history of Western thought, and thus ought,
when properly approached and sensitively expounded, to form part of the core
curriculum of general education, for which humanists, even in these days of
hyperspecialization and scientistic textology, are still widely held
responsible.

The only popular book I can think of offhand that attempts to meet this glaring
need is TURING'S MAN: Western Culture in the Computer Age, by J. David Bolter,
a Classics scholar who took several years off to study Computer Science at
Yale. We need, for starters, a list of other such books, however short, and
another list of Computer Scientists and others in and outside of academe with
the rare gift for and interest in making these crucial connections come alive
for the rest of us.

Then perhaps we can reconvene to start talking curriculum...
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------45----
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 89 12:50:02 EDT
From: bobh@phoenix.uucp (Robert Hollander)
Subject: Re: 3.610 humanists and computers (72)

I'm not at all sure that the Cope/McCarty explanation (more Cope's than
McCarty's) works, since I know humanists of a distinctly "19th-cent."
tendency of mind who embrace the technology. I think it as all a lot simpler,
this lack of interest/desire to get hooked up to the rest of the world
via electronic communication. I find it almost as prevalent among my
students (grad. and undergrad.) as among my colleagues. However, when one
reflects that 10 yrs. ago our colleagues who used comps. for word processing
were a tiny minority and now are a vast majority, I think it is safe to
predict that in ten more years approx. that great a shift will also occur
in this kind of activity as well. Thus it is the task of those of us who
are numbered among the "converted" not only to convert others, but, _even
more importantly_, to get our deans, comp. centers, and foundations to
begin to prepare for the huge wave of users that is building up and
will likely overwhelm existing resources. Let me offer two statistics
to show what I mean: In 1988 the fed govt. of USA spent approx. $30M
on all kinds of humanistic rsch.; on science and engin. the figure was
$9BILLION; i.e., USGovt. spends 1/3 of 1% as much on hums. as science
and engin. Second stat.: In 1988 Research Tools program at NEH was
able to fund 6% of all _new_ applicants during that funding cycle. (That
first statistic applies only to RESEARCH, not to other activities of a hum.
kind.)

My own sense is that what we are dealing with is not reticence that is
significantly related to a particular disposition or set of mind, but
one that is normally human, a mixture of fear and laziness when confronted
with a choice that has not been demonstrated as a clearly useful good.
I'm afraid it simply becomes a task of those who are convinced of the
importance of the new technological tools to the growth of their
disciplines to spend some time crying in the wilderness.
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------20----
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 89 22:27:24 EDT
From: Natalie Maynor <MAYNOR@MSSTATE>
Subject: Re: 3.611 humanists and computers, cont. (165)

Don Spaeth has perhaps hit upon the key to the computer-resistance
of many academicians: "Of course, teaching and research are hard
work too, but they don't involve the psychological trauma of having
to start from the beginning and reveal one's ignorance." The last
three words are the key.
Natalie Maynor, English Dept., Mississippi State Univ.