How Humanities Superpowers differs from Superpowers¶
Humanities Superpowers is inspired by the idea of composable agent skills, but it is not a direct translation of software-development practices into academic prose.
obra/superpowers orientation |
Humanities Superpowers orientation |
|---|---|
| software development methodology | humanities research methodology scaffold |
| test-driven development | claim–evidence–counterargument verification |
| debugging program behavior | diagnosing conceptual slippage, interpretive overreach, and category errors |
| implementation plans | argument maps and research boundaries |
| code review | manuscript review and reviewer simulation |
| tests before completion | source, terminology, argument, privacy, and submission gates |
| executable correctness | accountable but contestable interpretation |
What is retained at the level of principle¶
- systematic rather than ad hoc process;
- evidence before completion claims;
- reusable, composable skills;
- explicit conditions for invoking a skill;
- stop conditions when required evidence is missing;
- verification as a distinct final act.
What is deliberately changed¶
1. No humanities equivalent of a passing unit test¶
Interpretations cannot usually be reduced to binary tests. The framework therefore checks traceability, proportionality, counterevidence, conceptual consistency, and disclosed uncertainty rather than declaring an interpretation objectively proven.
2. Close reading is not data extraction¶
The agent must connect an interpretation to specific formal, rhetorical, textual, visual, or material features. It must also record plausible rival readings.
3. Citations are not decorations¶
A citation must exist, be correctly identified, and actually support the claim attached to it. Bibliographic completion is not allowed through guessing.
4. The framework resists ghostwriting¶
structuring-humanities-argument organizes researcher-provided claims, notes, and evidence. It marks missing warrants and unsupported transitions. It does not authorize the agent to impersonate the researcher's original scholarly judgment.
5. Uncertainty is an output¶
When verification fails, the correct result is an unresolved-item list—not fluent filler.