Rogat+-+Memo+2+-+Habits,+Neurosis,+Talents

Michelle Rogat Memo 2
 * Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object?
 * It really depends on what the problem or situation I'm focusing on really is. If an issue is prevalent I get really focused on the issues at hand and then after a while I am able to take a step back to try and look at systemic causes or overlying societal issues. If I'm not close to an issue, as in directly involved or effected, then the social theoretical questions come to me first. It's a lot harder to get to the nitty gritty of the object at hand when I have to first familiarize myself with the situation to get an understanding. Once I do get a fuller view of the different sides to an issue I really like to shift perspectives and play devil's advocate and know the opposition's arguments also, I even do this with problems that arise in my daily life.
 * Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this?
 * If I can get hooked into an issue then I will stick to a project, at least for a while. Then life happens and I have to study a different issue for my next class or something and that previous project gets put on the back burner for a while, but doesn't get forgotten. There are multiple projects I'd like to go back to at some point. I will even add notes to my old ones if a new idea or information comes up that could be useful or that I will want to check into for the future. My project hopping really comes down to time constraint. If I have a ton of work going on or school research that I have to tend to, that comes first. Then when I have time, like over the summer or when a have a freak moment when I find myself with free time, I go back to it.
 * Do you tend to be more interested in internal dynamics, or external determinations? In the terms laid out by Keller, do you tend to focus so intently on the object of your concern that context falls away (i.e. are you obsessive compulsive, rather than paranoid)? Is your desire is to name, specify and control your object? Is your desire is for figure, its ground your annoyance? Or are you paranoid, context being your focus and obsession? All is signal. Only begrudgingly will you admit that something is noise, outside the scope of your project? Figure is hard to come by. Its ground has captured your attention.
 * I can get completely drawn in and become obsessed, but I realize there are drawbacks to doing that, I could miss out on the bigger picture. So I try to remind myself to take that step back once in a while and try to views things in a different light to try to gain another perspective. This usually leads to further research down some tangent I find that will be useful in the end. However, I am very interested in the external determinations because those are the actual outcomes that will come from the research. I don't want the research and insight to an issue go to waste, it's very important to share that information. That can be a hurdle in itself with me though because sometimes I get the feeling like who am I to tell the people involved in the issue what solutions there could be? How and why would they listen, and am I overstepping some invisible line. I am still very new to this kind of research though, so I think I've only found myself feeling that way once.
 * What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it?
 * At first I was deterred and sort of stubbornly annoyed by counter examples in my research. I quickly realized though that if I ignored them it would just make my research incomplete and I had to face those counter examples head on and understand what made them different. That's when the research would usually broaden to accept other ideas and solutions so it would be an advantage in the end.
 * Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives?
 * I try to look at everything with logic and reasoning, but I'm not sure what the question means by resisting the construction of coherent narratives. If I don't follow another's logic I try to understand why my train of thought is so different than theirs and hopefully that will make something click that can help the conversation towards progress or better understanding. I try to keep in mind that different cultures and societies can have a different path to their logic and reasoning that is different than ours and that can help with understanding things.
 * Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument?
 * I am a very bluntly honest person, so holding back is something I only do until I try to find the right words to express my thoughts before I do harm instead of help. But no, I don't hold back from much at all.
 * Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them?
 * I enjoy reading other interpretations because it has the effect of a paradigm shift and a whole new world of thought comes to mind, I love it. Sometimes it can be shocking though.
 * Do you tend to change an argument as you flesh it out, or do you tend to make the argument work, no matter what?
 * Depending on what I find in the research I will change the argument accordingly. I am almost afraid of those that pick the argument first and back it up no matter what because I feel I can't entirely trust their findings.
 * 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?
 * Yes, I refer to other examples and situations constantly. I have done that my whole life though, when trying to explain some things to friends I would refer to scenes in a movie. I am also a very spatially oriented learner, which is very useful I find when it came to math and science. When learning about the immune system in high school for instance I would always think of it as the different levels of an army. I find it helps bring others to the same understanding you are at when you can relate to a mostly universal image.
 * 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.”)
 * Things are rarely black and white. I am very quickly realizing we live in a very grey world. So if something doesn't fit into two specific categories it wouldn't bother me because there are things that make everything unique in some way. Not completely unique every time where it would classify it something different, but sometimes that does happen. I think it's a part of learning about the diversity of the world to realize this.

Questions in Class Brought Up
 * How do you feel about unspoken rules?
 * I find I am sometimes unaware of unspoken rules, because they usually involve a tradition I'm not familiar with, like saying grace before eating dinner. If I am aware of them then I usually follow the unspoken rules, like those of being polite and giving respect. However, I'm not really big on following the rules if I don't understand the point or logic behind them. I guess that leads me into my next question...
 * Are you a leader or a follower?
 * I end up being a leader because I am stubborn and like to have things done in a particular way. I do find that other times I will relinquish the leader role if I feel I am just not up to it and I will quietly follow and still do things my way, at least I find myself doing this at work. My way is usually in accordance with how things should be done and how I am instructed to do it. I end up leading because others are lazy or just don't have the motivation or drive.
 * What I prefer is an open dialogue on what the plan is, why, and how we are going to get things done.
 * Are you more for advocacy with your research or are you strictly research?
 * I am more for advocacy with my research, I feel like what is the point of it all if it can't go to some good use.
 * Where do you see research going? Now, in 5 years, in 20 years?
 * Right now I see my research sticking with the environmental movement and sustainability, more specifically in policy, economics, and the social behavioral side.
 * Do you follow current issues and debates?
 * I didn't used to follow the news and current event/debates nearly as much as I do now. Now I listen to NPR and PRI on the radio constantly and pay attention to the news through them. I find that the news broadcasts on the television aren't very useful and are extremely repetitive. The radio stations I follow go more in depth with interviews and even panel debates with experts from various fields talking over one issue. I really think I owe this to my classes this semester, because everything I seemed to be learning ended up being mentioned on the radio and for once I understood complex conversations about world wide issues. I also get email updates from certain organizations like the Worldwatch Institute that will inform me of any new important information.

What I learned about myself this semester:
 * I am a person that definitely needs structure to be able to stay on track with work. I am still a horrible procrastinator, even when I am really interested in research it doesn't seem to make a difference.
 * Keeping to a schedule and logging how I spend my research hours helps my productivity.
 * When I do fall behind on my work I start to doubt the value of my work, you could almost call it academic self-esteem issues. That term would also explain why I sometimes feel like I don't fit in with the extremely smart students I go to school with, like I'm an impostor! Sounds ridiculous, but it's true, when I realized I could conceivably get my research time paid for through a stipend on my OWN research, I couldn't believe it. It's still hard to believe.