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

Habits Talents neuroses  Edit  [| 0]  [| 2] [|…] Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object? I tend to have more trouble articulating the objects of my research. I have a much easier time identifying the social problems/questions that interest me.

Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this? I tend to project hop; I like to be involved in a number of different projects. Not only does this keep my from getting too hung up, or “stuck”, on one project, but I think it also helps me to stay a well-rounded student/researcher/etc.

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 think I tend to be more interested in external determinations. I suppose this qualifies me as paranoid, in Keller’s terms. At times, I have trouble focusing in on one specific aspect of a project, and can become overwhelmed by everything that affects and is affected by the topic of study.

What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it? I am definitely drawn in by the unusual, or by counter examples. I think that by paying particular attention to “the deviant”, we open new doors and provoke new ideas within our research. Where I often run into trouble is in trying to keep everything relevant to the topic at hand.

Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives? I am unsure; at times I do tend to over-impose logic on the world (perhaps because part of me wants to think that every event/action follows some sort of logical plan). However, there are definitely times when events seem to defy all logic. So, perhaps I am a little bit of both?. .

Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument? I try to avoid overgeneralizing. The research that we do consists of so many complex parts that at times it seems impossible to form any sensible generalized statement.

Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them? I enjoy reading/hearing interpretations that are different from my own. It forces me to re-evaluate my own conclusions, and I feel that this is what allows me to grow as a researcher.

Do you tend to change an argument as you flesh it out, or do you tend to make the argument work, no matter what? I’d like to say that I would change my argument to whatever the research suggests. However, I know that I am sometimes a stubborn individual, and that oftentimes I will do whatever I can to make a particular argument work.

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 definitely tend to think metaphorically. I often find myself drawing on comparison to formulate my argument.

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 do not like having to define my ways of understanding as “one or the other”, as this questionnaire attempts to do. This is partly because I do not think the topic is as simple as a “this or that” question, but it may also be partly because I find myself struggling to answer most of these questions. In most cases, I find myself thinking, “well, sometimes I do this, but other times I do this.” I understand the value of analyzing oneself in this way, however.