Memo+2+-+Habits,+Neuroses,+Talents


 * • Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object?**

Generally I have more trouble articulating my frame; I am fairly confident in my ability to articulate the object of my argument, however, when articulating the frame I tend to struggle staying focused on the questions that should establish the framework of my argument.


 * • Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this?**

When it comes to school projects, I tend to project hop simply because I feel that time restrictions require me to work on a portion of each project every day. If I were to finish one project before starting another I would probably feel more pressured to meet the deadlines and it would be rather monotonous, causing me to get bored more easily which may affect the quality of my work.


 * • 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 tend to focus on the object of my concern very intently, which may be detrimental to my argument since I may focus too heavily on detail causing me to lose sight of the "big picture".


 * • What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it?**

I find unusual or counter examples to be valuable, and I may find a way to use them in a way to strengthen my argument; however, I would not say that I am either drawn or repulsed to “the deviant”. Obviously, I would prefer examples that strongly supported my argument over unusual or counter examples, but I believe unusual or counter examples have the potential to be valuable for my argument.


 * • Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives?**

I do not resist the construction of coherent narratives, but I believe that individuals are entitled to their own opinions.


 * • Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument?**

I find myself over-generalizing and holding back from the overarching argument due to my tendency to focus so intently on details that I neglect to relate those details back to the argument in a way that strengthens or supports the argument.


 * • Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them?**

Like unusual or counter examples, I find interpretations different than my own to be valuable because I feel that these differing interpretations allow me to consider viewpoints that I would not have necessarily thought of on my own.


 * • Do you tend to change an argument as you flesh it out, or do you tend to make the argument work, no matter what?**

If I am a firmly believe in the argument I am presenting then I would make it work; however, if I am provided with significant supporting evidence that shifts my argument in a certain direction, then my argument may change as I flesh it out.


 * • 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?**

I prefer examples that "say it all", simply because I believe they strengthen my argument. However, it is helpful for me to think of terms of "this is kind of like" due to the fact that being able to relate examples to things I am already familiar with assist in my understanding of the examples.


 * • 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.”)**

I have embraced the fact that my answers will not always fit exclusively on one side of the spectrum, so I would not say that this makes me frustrated. Rather, this allows me to approach the questions from a different perspective that I may not have otherwise thought of.