Prince+Memo+2

Memo 2: Habits, Neuroses, Talents Taylor Prince 2 September 2013

• Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object?
 * Yes, but I expect that to diminish quickly. Once I read into research examples and outlines, I can replicate the process of frame articulation. **

• Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this?
 * I used to project-hop, but now I am narrowing my focus. This is the cause of both material and academic frustration. At one point, I could have been a certified hoarder, but now I have taken a minimalist approach. This carried over into academic life, so I am delegating many former responsibilities to others so I can take more pride in individual projects. The ‘quality over quantity’ approach is working well. **

• Do you tend to be more interested in internal dynamics, or external determinations?
 * I would hope for my project to take into account many factors that consist of internal dynamics. Although my experience of non-web-based research is rather low, I am sure that some of it must be dismissed as “noise”. **

• What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it?
 * I always look for examples to challenge conventional thought or research. This is true for my [green, liberal, religious] views as well as the opposing views. ** **Keeps things interesting.**

• Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives?
 * Despite over-generalizing, I seem to resist forming coherent narratives. ** **I tend to think that the many external factors may be taken into account with better technology and research methods, but I believe it is too soon to do so.**

• Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument?
 * Without a doubt, I over-generalize. It helps that I enjoy finding contradictions, but often I see them as exceptions that prove the rule. **

• Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them?
 * I typically read into the interpretations of others before determining my own. Thus, I could not feel intimidated if the opposite were to happen. **

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">• Do you tend to change an argument as you flesh it out, or do you tend to make the argument work, no matter what? <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> **I’ve always seen arguments as wasted breath if both parties don’t have an open mind regarding the discussion. That said, I’ve wasted a lot of breath.**

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">• Do you tend to think in terms of “this is kind of like” (metaphorically)? Do you hold to examples that “say it all,” leveraging metonymic thinking?
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Only in debate. My all-encompassing metaphorical examples only provide a vague scope in research. **

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">• Do you like gaming understanding in this way? Does it frustrate you that your answers often don’t fit easily on either side of the binaries set up by the questions? (Jakobson suggests that over attachment to a simple binary scheme is a “continuity disorder.”)
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">It’s frustrating, but I see climate modeling as a similar example. The system is complex, and the answers are also very complex and not binary. It does not mean they are inaccurate, just not to the simple scale that I would like. **