Anderson+Memo+2

**Habits, Neuroses, and Talents**
 **• Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object?** I have more trouble articulating my frame. The social theoretical questions can be difficult—sometimes I know what I am trying to ask, but putting it into words is very difficult.

 I tend to get bored with a project. While I’ll often see it through, when I get bored, the quality of my work suffers. In order to combat this tendency, I try to focus on projects that will require different types of research or thought to give me a rest.
 * • Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this? **

I do tend to focus on the object I am thinking of, but not so much that the big picure fades away. The big picture is very important to me—where does my question or research fit in? I guess the answer is: somewhere in between.
 * • 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. **

When something is unusual, I’m curious //why//. Sometimes, something that at first seems to disprove a point might actually be “the exception that proves the rule”, as the saying goes. Or, perhaps, my first hypothesis was wrong.
 * • What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it? **

I am a very logical person. I do not like abstraction. Everything has its place and an explanation in this world—that is its magic.
 * • Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives? **

I do tend to generalize; I like to find patterns in similar things. Sometimes, I have found patterns in things many people would have found completely unrelated.
 * • Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument? **

I sometimes enjoy reading interpretations that differ from my own, mostly to try to catch flaws in their argument. If I am still working on my interpretation, reading arguments against the one I am leaning towards is very useful for me to cement my own opinion.
 * • Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them? **

I mostly shy away from making an argument when I do not know enough. I have at times felt I knew enough about a topic (cities, for example), but as I learned more and visited more cities, I realized they could indeed be sustainable. I critically think about every source I read, and whether it makes sense, whether the author’s credentials are good. Good sources that rationally argue and explain why other arguments are invalid are most likely to change my mind. Poor sources that attack other arguments are likely to turn me away from the argument the poor source is making.
 * • 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 do often think metaphorically. I am a writer and am always making those kinds of connections. These connections help make the world beautiful.
 * <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="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;">I find it interesting but complicated that there are rarely simple, binary solutions to a problem. I’ve been writing a fictional story series since high school and one major question asked by many of the characters is “what is development, and should our [imaginary third world, developing] country develop?” There is no one right answer to this, of course, and each person has different views based on their background. Some of the people love their culture and want to preserve it, while others want to develop partially in hopes that it will make their lives easier.