<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>numbers &#8211; dh+lib</title>
	<atom:link href="https://dhandlib.org/tag/numbers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://dhandlib.org</link>
	<description>where the digital humanities and librarianship meet</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:34:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">180836968</site>	<item>
		<title>POST: A Kind of Skepticism Humanists Should Hold On To</title>
		<link>https://dhandlib.org/post-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=post-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Zach Coble]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[dh+lib review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[numbers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quantitative methods]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://dhandlib.org/?p=6723</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Ted Underwood, Associate Professor of English at the University of Illinois, continues his examination of some of the areas of overlap between the humanities and more quantitative disciplines. Underwood&#8217;s main concern is that numbers tend to distract the eye. If you quantify part of your argument, critics (including your own internal critic) will tend to ...<a class="post-readmore" href="https://dhandlib.org/post-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to/">read more</a>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a class="a2a_button_twitter" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fdhandlib.org%2Fpost-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to%2F&amp;linkname=POST%3A%20A%20Kind%20of%20Skepticism%20Humanists%20Should%20Hold%20On%20To" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_pocket" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/pocket?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fdhandlib.org%2Fpost-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to%2F&amp;linkname=POST%3A%20A%20Kind%20of%20Skepticism%20Humanists%20Should%20Hold%20On%20To" title="Pocket" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_buffer" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/buffer?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fdhandlib.org%2Fpost-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to%2F&amp;linkname=POST%3A%20A%20Kind%20of%20Skepticism%20Humanists%20Should%20Hold%20On%20To" title="Buffer" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><a class="a2a_button_facebook" href="https://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=https%3A%2F%2Fdhandlib.org%2Fpost-a-kind-of-skepticism-humanists-should-hold-on-to%2F&amp;linkname=POST%3A%20A%20Kind%20of%20Skepticism%20Humanists%20Should%20Hold%20On%20To" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a></p><p>Ted Underwood, Associate Professor of English at the University of Illinois, <a href="http://tedunderwood.com/2013/08/18/a-kind-of-skepticism-that-humanists-shouldnt-give-up/">continues his examination</a> of some of the areas of overlap between the humanities and more quantitative disciplines. Underwood&#8217;s main concern is that</p>
<blockquote><p>numbers tend to distract the eye. If you quantify part of your argument, critics (including your own internal critic) will tend to focus on problems in the numbers, and ignore the deeper problems located elsewhere.</p></blockquote>
<p>Underwood uses the example of his series of posts on genre in large digital collections to illustrate how the quantitative-focused feedback he received kept him from seeing the more significant problem in how he was understanding the concept of genre itself. He continues,</p>
<blockquote><p>Skepticism about foundational concepts has been one of the great strengths of the humanities. The fact that we have a word for something (say genre or the individual) doesn’t necessarily imply that any corresponding entity exists in reality. Humanists call this mistake “reification,” and we should hold onto our skepticism about it.</p></blockquote>
 <!-- WP Biographia v4.0.0 -->
<div class="wp-biographia-container-top" style="background-color: #F7F7F7; border-top: 4px solid #000000;"><div class="wp-biographia-text-no-pic"><h3>dh+lib Review</h3><p>This post was produced through a cooperation between Hugh Burkhart, Christopher A. Miller, Caitlin Pollock, and Jennifer Snider (Editors-at-Large for the week), Zach Coble (Editor for the week), and Roxanne Shirazi and Caro Pinto (dh+lib Review Editors).</p></div></div><!-- WP Biographia v4.0.0 -->
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6723</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
