rers. The inter- dependence of form and content in other areas of study teaches us that tools are not neutral. Although tools may begin as external objects, in learning to master their use we internalize them (Ong, 1982, p. 81). Thus they become perceptual agents - "new technologies for thinking," as Alan Kay calls them (1991, p. 140) - whose charac- teristics affect how and what we know and do through them. According to the Torontonian scholars Harold Innis, Eric Havelock, Marshall McLuhan, and others, and more recently Walter Ong, "writing restructures consciousness."9 Dis- covering how this happens (e.g. with e-mail) is a formidable task, however, since the new per- ceptual agent is itself a product of the mind it affects, and that altered mind is what attempts to understand the agent that has chan

"' First, humanists must be aware that they are engaging primarily in social, not technical, end

The ideal seminar, whether traditional or electronic, is a kind of long conversation, con- vened by a single person but conducted by everyone for mutual enlightenment. Its purpose is not so much to convey facts as to further under- standing of its subject, to train the minds of its participants, and so to help create a community of scholars. It is a pedagogical structure in which every member is both teacher and student

ListServ lists are sometimes called "discussion groups," and McLuhan has made the term "global village" almost unavoidable. As I have indicated, I prefer to call HUMANIST an "electronic semi- nar" (henceforth "e-seminar") and so invoke the academic metaphor of a large table around which everyone sits for the purpose of argumentation, in

Because e-mail is restricted to verbal expression, it tends to favor those with highly developed rhetorical skills (Spitzer, 1986; Adrianson and Hjelmquist, 1988, pp. 91, 96), and because it is particularly good for lively argument, it serves well the need of scholars to reach consensus

On the practical level, HUMANIST and similar groups have demonstrated that we can certainly take advantage of the new medium for traditional scholarly and academic purposes. Experience with HUMANIST suggests that the new medium, care- fully managed, may be just what is needed to foster widespread humanistic discussion and collabora- tion in a world largely indifferent to its goal

ote, we have used speech and gestures for some 50,000 years, writing for 5,000, printing for 500, the telephone for 100, but e-mail for less than two decades (1985, p. 11; Rice, 1987, p. 69). Thus it is not surprizing that although the sociology and social-psychology of groups constituted by it have been repeatedly studied during this period,4 our knowledge is s

d to our immature understanding of the new me

One of the earliest nonscience scholarly uses of this technology was the listHumanist,

McCarty saw a kind of electronic seminar, whosepurpose was ‘‘not so much to convey facts as to further understanding of its subject, to trainthe minds of its participants, and so to help create a community of scholars.’’

In some ways, the exchange of correspondence publicly over these networksconstitutes a new form of publication. The posting on a list frequently resembles a letter to theeditor where someone conveys their opinions on a subjec