Digital Humanities: Is it a New Science or a Set of Models and Practices of the Global Network Project?

Introduction. Digital Humanities (DH), formed in the mid-20th century, represent a dynamic direction of social and humanitarian disciplines that use computer technology in research and education. The actuality of the paper is to determine trends in the development of Social Science and Humanities in the digital age: hybridization of Humanities, transformation of subject and research goals, predominance of instrumental interdisciplinary in the methododogy of research. Despite the active growth of institutions, technologies, models and practices of Digital Humanities, researchers do not have a unity of views on this direction. The objectives of the study are to analyze approaches to the definition of the concept, typology and basic characteristics of DH. Scientific novelty is expressed in the proposed typologiy of paradigms, models and practices of this direction. The paper defines theoretical status of DH.

Methodology and sources. The paper uses Philosophical methodology for comparative analysis of the developing models (paradigms), including text analysis, quantitative research, digitization of image collections, Humanities Computer Science, as well as digital socio-humanitarian models and practices, such as Digital Philosophy, Digital History, Digital Social Research, Digital Self-Presentation, “Art and Science”, and others. Taken together, they represent the implementation of DH as the Global Network Project realization. The research is carried out on the material of Russian and foreign textbooks on Digital Humanities, scientific publications, and websites.

Results and discussion. The paper presents an analysis of the DH development stages, provides justification for the concept and its main aspects. Analysis of approaches to the definition of DH reveals the main trends: a) DH represent a new interdisciplinary research direction that use information technology in traditional humanitarian fields to achieve meaningful goals; b) DH represent the ways of modeling and producing innovations. Their essential characteristics are: methodological and instrumental interdisciplinary and commercialization of innovations, transformation of the criteria of science (objectivity of knowledge, loss of disciplinary boundaries. The DH research typology criteria are defined according to basic paradigms, subject areas, research goals, and major institutions. An analysis of the main types of digital research is presented. The problem of the ambivalence of digital technologies used in DH is considered as the main risks: a) for the Humanities - “loss of focus” (technologization of language leads to the technologization of the memory of society; b) for a human (as a result of the predominance of the network forms of communication, the highest value for a person - freedom of choice and the meaning of being may be lost); c) for society (transformation of human communications into network forms of sociality).

Conclusion. The expansion of digital technologies use in scientific research, education, culture, in general – and in the Humanities, in particular, is due to the global technological trends of the fourth industrial revolution. According to experts, the definition of “digital” in various areas of Digital Humanities does not express their essence, but characterizes the “computing” technologies used in the Social and Humanitarian knowledge. Accordingly, they do not represent independent scientific disciplines, but are models and practices that use information technology as instruments to solve the objectives of the Humanities and exchange knowledge and methods between scientists, engineers, designers, and students. In general, those changes characterize the process of the new science image development in the network society.

1. Mozhaeva, G.V. (2015), “Digital Humanities: Digital Turn in the Humanities”, Humanitarian Informatics, no. 9, pp. 8–23.

2. Thaller, M. (2012), “Controversies around the Digital Humanities”, Historical Information Science, no. 1. pp. 5–13.

3. Volodin, A.Yu. (2014), “Digital humanities in search of self-defining”, Perm University Herald. History, no. 3 (26), pp. 5–12.

4. Samostienko, E.V. (2018), “Digital Humanities in the Russian Сontext: the Trajectory of Institutionalization and the Mechanisms for the Formation of Autonomous Zones”, Herald of Vyatka State University, iss. 4, pp. 37–45.

5. Makulin, A.V. (2016), “Intellectual systems within the humanities and digital philosophy”, Vestnik of Pomor University. Series “Humanitarian and Social Sciences”, no. 2, pp. 76–86. DOI:10.17238/issn2227-6564.2016.2.76.

6. Schwab, K. (2016), “The Fourth Industrial Revolution”, Transl., in A. Merkur'eva (ed.), Eksmo, Moscow, RUS.

7. Ylelkina, E.E., Kononova, O.V. and Prokudin, D.E. (2019), “Typology of Contexts and Contextual Approach Principles in Multidisciplinary Scientific Research”, Modern Information Technologies and IT-Education, vol. 15, no. 1. pp. 141–153. DOI: 10.25559/SITITO.15.201901.141-153.

8. Defining Digital Humanities. A Reader (2017), in Terras, M., Nyhan, Ju., Vanhoutte, E. and Kizhner, I. (eds.), Transl., Siberian Federal Univ., Krasnoyarsk, RUS.

9. Kuz'mina, D.Yu. and Prudenko, Ya.D. (2012), “Humanities in the Digital Age, or the Inevitability of Disciplinary Hybridization”, International Journal of Cultural Research, no. 3 (8), pp. 17–23.

10. Dakos, M. (2011), Manifest Digital Humanities, available at: http://tcp.hypotheses.org/501accessed 18.05.2020).

11. Rudov, I.N. (2016), “Trends” in the Digital Humanities: Bibliometric Analysis Based on the Scopus Database”, Informatsionnyi byulleten'' assotsiatsii istoriya i komp''yuter [Association Fact Sheet History and Computer], no. 45, pp. 25–27.

12. The Digital Humanities Manifesto 2.0, available at: https://www.humanitiesblast.com/manifesto/Manifesto_V2.pdf (accessed 05.05.2020).

13. Zorin, A.L. (2019), “About epistemological status of the concept “digital humanities”, Kul'tura i vremya peremen [Culture and time for change], no. 2 (25), available at: http://timekguki.esrae.ru/pdf/2019/2(25)/444.pdf (accessed 02.05.2020).

14. Zakharova, U.S., Mozhaeva, G.V., Mozhaeva, P.N., Rozhneva, Zh.A., Serbin, V.A. and Khaminova, A.A. (2016), Digital Humanities: gumanitarnye nauki v tsifrovuyu epokhu [Digital Humanities: The Humanities in the Digital Age], in Mozhaeva, G.V. (ed.), Izd-vo Tomskogo un-ta, Tomsk, RUS.

15. Arthur, P. (2009), “Virtual strangers: e-Research and the Humanities”, International Journal of Culture and History in Australia, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 47–59.

16. Zhuravleva, E.Yu. (2011), “Modern models of developments of humanitarian sciences in the digital environment”, Russian Studies in Philosophy, no. 5, pp. 91–98.

17. Zemnukhova, L.V. (2020), “How digital technologies are transforming social sciences”, Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review], no. 1, pp. 23–33.

18. Mozhaeva, G.V. (2015), “Digital Humanities: Digital Turn in the Humanities”, Humanitarian Informatics, no. 9, pp. 8–23.

19. Pogorskiy, E.K. (2014), “Features of Digital Humanities”, Knowledge. Understanding. Skill, no. 5, available at: http:/www.zpu-journal.ru/e-zpu/2014/5Pogorskiy_Digital Humanities/ (accessed 05.04.2020).

20. Volodin, A.Yu. (2014), “Digital humanities in search of self-defining”, Perm University Herald. History, no. 3 (26), pp. 5–12.

21. Manning, P. (2013), Big Data in History, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK. DOI: 10.1057/9781137378972.

22. Makulin, A.V. (2016), “Intellectual systems within the humanities and digital philosophy”, Vestnik of Pomor University. Series “Humanitarian and Social Sciences”, no. 2, pp. 76–86. DOI:10.17238/issn2227-6564.2016.2.76.

23. Vanhoutte, E. (2017), “Gates of Hell: History and Definition of Digital (Humanities) Sciences / Humanistic Informatics”, Defining Digital Humanities. A Reader, in Terras, M., Nyhan, Ju., Vanhoutte, E. and Kizhner, I. (eds.), Transl., Siberian Federal Univ., Krasnoyarsk, RUS. pp. 151–194.

24. Ylelkina, E.E., Kononova, O.V. and Prokudin, D.E. (2019), “Typology of Contexts and Contextual Approach Principles in Multidisciplinary Scientific Research”, Modern Information Technologies and IT-Education, vol. 15, no. 1. pp. 141–153. DOI: 10.25559/SITITO.15.201901.141-153.

25. Mamina, R.I. (2020), Iskusstvo samoprezentatsii v epokhu tsifry [The art of self-presentation in the digital age], Petropolis, SPb., RUS.

26. Kuz'mina, D.Yu. and Prudenko, Ya.D. (2012), “Humanities in the Digital Age, or the Inevitability of Disciplinary Hybridization”, International Journal of Cultural Research, no. 3 (8), pp. 17–23.

27. Rudov, I.N. (2016), “Trends” in the Digital Humanities: Bibliometric Analysis Based on the Scopus Database”, Informatsionnyi byulleten'' assotsiatsii istoriya i komp''yuter [Association Fact Sheet History and Computer], no. 45, pp. 25–27.

28. Zorin, A.L. (2019), “About epistemological status of the concept “digital humanities”, Kul'tura i vremya peremen [Culture and time for change], no. 2 (25), available at: http://timekguki.esrae.ru/pdf/2019/2(25)/444.pdf (accessed 02.05.2020).

29. Arthur, P. (2009), “Virtual strangers: e-Research and the Humanities”, International Journal of Culture and History in Australia, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 47–59.

30. Zemnukhova, L.V. (2020), “How digital technologies are transforming social sciences”, Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review], no. 1, pp. 23–33.

31. Pogorskiy, E.K. (2014), “Features of Digital Humanities”, Knowledge. Understanding. Skill, no. 5, available at: http:/www.zpu-journal.ru/e-zpu/2014/5Pogorskiy_Digital Humanities/ (accessed 05.04.2020).

32. Manning, P. (2013), Big Data in History, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK. DOI: 10.1057/9781137378972.

33. Vanhoutte, E. (2017), “Gates of Hell: History and Definition of Digital (Humanities) Sciences / Humanistic Informatics”, Defining Digital Humanities. A Reader, in Terras, M., Nyhan, Ju., Vanhoutte, E. and Kizhner, I. (eds.), Transl., Siberian Federal Univ., Krasnoyarsk, RUS. pp. 151–194.

34. Mamina, R.I. (2020), Iskusstvo samoprezentatsii v epokhu tsifry [The art of self-presentation in the digital age], Petropolis, SPb., RUS.