Type A: First Me, Then ChatGPT My Post: When I first started taking digital humanities classes, […]


Responses to “Definitions for the Digital”

  1. Catherine Eyre Avatar
    Catherine Eyre

    It’s strange seeing ChatGPT write in the first person. For some reason I’d kind of assumed if asked for a personal opinion it’d tap out, but apparently not. Apparently, it just gets very insistent that the ideas it’s discussing are “for me”, “to me”, “my vision”, “in my perspective”, “for me”, and “my personal journey” every other sentence.

  2. Garrett Mast Avatar
    Garrett Mast

    For one, 10/10 with the DALL-E image of defining Digitial Humanities, couldn’t have said it better myself. I agree that DH lacks a single definition, and I think that’s an inherent part of the field, it being a nebulous idea of what can be done regarding humanities in a digital space. I find it rather humorous that arguing about this definition seems to be a core part of DH. Also, I think ChatGPT using the first person was slightly ‘uncanny valley.’ It feels weird, a slightly unnatural use of first person that I can’t quite place, mixed with the super common ChatGPT structure of way too short paragraphs.

  3. Brian Croxall Avatar

    Interesting to see ChatGPT take on the first-person here, which was obviously steered by asking for it to “explain what [DH] mean[s] to you” (emphasis added).

    In other perspectives, I’m not surprised that people have wanted to know what these classes are that you’re taking, Elijah. Anytime I tell people what I teach/study, I have to then explain what it is. I have a couple of things I can throw out to help people get a sense of it. But it’s clear that “digital humanities” doesn’t make sense in the way that “biology” or “music theory” would.

  4. Maria Durrans Avatar

    I agree with your point that there may not be a singular definition of what the digital humanities is. I think it is something that varies within the context of the situation. Thanks for sharing!