More and more I have noticed articles on Wired magazine sounding less and less informed. This latest piece about how models are no longer needed in science is ridiculous and uninformed. The fact that Mr. Anderson is the editor in chief is scary. I may have an incorrect understanding of science but from what I gather, a model does not allow you to tie together a correlation with causation…. nothing does. Furthermore, from my experience with genetics, I was always always always taught that DNA works WITH the environment rather than in isolation from it.
The most enjoyable reading from this article were the comments.
Wait. I just re-read it… he said “petabytes allow us to say ‘correlation is enough’.” I sure hope the writer of this article is no longer the editor-in-chief of Wired…
Filed under: Uncategorized
February 9, 2009 • 5:05 pm
I feel that Burrows’ idea of computational stylistics is an interesting one. I especially like his analogy:
But the real value of studying the common words rests on the fact that they constitute the underlying fabric of a text, a barely visible web that gives shape to whatever is being said.
I also agree with the idea that both computational text analysis and traditional forms of text analysis both have their place. In fact, to me it’s quite clear that there is enough room within the humanities for both to thrive… I wonder if it is as clear in other areas of the humanities.
However, if Burrows’ paper is a representative example, I can understand why computational techniques have not exactly taken off with gusto. His paper, with the large and distracting tables, appears at first glance as if it belongs in a science journal rather than a journal of the humanities. This in itself is not necessarily a bad thing; however, once you start reading the paper, you find that it is actually a paper from the humanities. The language is quite complex and the dialogue itself is extended and flowing.
To sum up how I feel about this paper: it takes the worst part of scientific papers (really really long sets of tabular data in the body of the text) and the worst part of papers from the humanities (really really complicated language where simple language would have done) and puts it in one. If this is what the cooperation of computational text analysis and traditional literary analysis will yield, I am scared.
In all seriousness however, I am looking forward to discussing the paper in class because I feel that there is a lot of good information in the paper… I just can’t get at it.
Filed under: Uncategorized
January 25, 2009 • 6:22 pm
I’ve found the adjustment from a science program to an arts department quite strange. I wouldn’t call it difficult, but it’s definitely very different. For example, the word theory is used a lot in both the sciences and humanities. However, in my opinion it’s used in completely a completely different sense in the arts when compared to the sciences.
In the sciences, not much thought is given to the word itself. You have a research project, you have a hypothesis, you test it, and after much repetition, it becomes a theory.
However, in the humanities the word takes on a different being. It’s a beastly word in the humanities partly because it has so many different definitions to people. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists 6 different definitions.
As a result, when the discussion of whether or not a thing is a theory, which definition are we working with? Are we even on the same page? Does it matter?
gars.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Alright, so here I am trying to catch up on posts and I realized that I need to do an introduction.
So, my name is Garry. For those of you who have not taken a class with me before this will be interesting. For those of you who have, it’s more of the same.
I have a BSc Psychology degree and my main interests are data visualisation and user interface design. I have a really general background having taken many different courses in many different disciplines ranging from microbiology to classics.
As for technical skills, I’m really good with html/css. And I have an introductory level of experience with java.
In huco, I’ve so far taken lis 598, huco 500, and des 493.
I also have atrocious spelling.
gars.
Filed under: Uncategorized
