I’m publishing my position statement for “Arguing with Digital History”, a workshop being held at George Mason University in September. We were asked to respond to the following questions:
- How is argumentation in digital history different from other forms of history, and how is it the same?
- Should DH argumentation be inherently disciplinary, or should it be interdisciplinary?
- Why is there not more digital history that makes explicit arguments in conversation with the scholarly literature, for an academic audience? What are the barriers to making arguments in digital history? If possible, include examples from your projects.
- What successful models have you found for making explicit arguments in conversation with the scholarly literature for an academic audience? In those models, what is the relationship between traditional venues for publication and digital projects?
- If applicable, how have you used digital history to make explicit arguments in conversation with the scholarly literature, for an academic audience? What is the relationship between the arguments you have made and the digital part of your project?
Read full post here.