Reason and love

"It is widely supposed that the two most precious capacities of our species, which make human life distinctively valuable and interesting, are that we can reason and that we can love. Each of these capacities is fully realized only when a person finds himself constrained by a kind of necessity. In the former case, it is the cognitive necessity of logic; in the latter, it is the volitional necessity of love. Reason is universal, in the sense that its dictates are equally binding on everyone. On the other hand, love is particular: the fact that I am devoted to certain ideals, or the fact that I love someone, does not lead me to think that anyone who does not do the same is making a mistake. The question of whom one is to love cannot be settled by developing a rigorous proof, nor can one rigorously demonstrate which ideals are properly to define the boundaries of one's will. This should not be taken to entail, however, that our volitional necessities must merely be acknowledged as givens - that is, accepted passively as brute facts with respect to which deliberation and rational critique have no place. The relationship between love and reason is an ancient philosophical theme, which it would be well for us to explore anew." (p. 26) Harry Frankfurt, On the Necessity of Ideals, in The Moral Self

Gosh, I find myself embroiled in this ancient philosophical debate, when I discovered myself, through patriotism, and I realized how love and reason and their entanglement is really something I daily face in my life, and also in my work.

The joys of quantitative research (!)

I am actually proud of myself that I had the guts to pick up a quantitative method again... Despite my past bad experiences with it and my belief that I was not inclined towards it.

I have challenged it through learning how to use Q Methodology. My ability to do abstract reasoning, works even with numbers, it does not merely work with words. I surprise myself. :) 

If not for struggling with it, making lots of mistakes, asking for help, and trying again, I would not have learned this about myself! :)

I love how quantitative data can surprise you in a way that qualitative data cannot. And I have learned not to fear surprises. I learned that there is a story waiting to be told, and I am the story writer. :) 

Impressed

Have you ever been impressed by your own work?

After a 9 months break from that paper, after overcoming my fear of reading it, and reading it... I was impressed, especially by the literature review. 

How did I so deftly come up with that critique and hence the space for my research? I commented, "Wow!!" 

For moments like these... This is the reason I chose to continue working on patriotism despite my interest in practically everything. I had a firm grasp of the literature and it enabled me to reshape it into many formations so that I can keep coming up with new angles to position my data!

I am so excited! Can't wait to do major revisions and send it back. *fingers crossed* I want to see this published. Among all the three articles I've written from my Masters research, to me, this is my grandest contribution to the field and to existing knowledge. Better journals may not agree, but I know this in my heart.

Major Revisions and Random Thoughts

It took 9 months to get back my manuscript with reviewer feedback. Again, I got to do major revisions. But this time, I was less upset, less afraid, than I had been in the past.

Something has fundamentally shifted in me as a person. I am changing and becoming more and more like who I really am inside.

I wonder how is this going to affect my writing? Will I become a more confident writer?

I must update you about the Q-method conference soon. Yes, that conference that I sort of carved my own way into it. I read up about the method, find a means to collect data, to write an abstract, and subsequently got my tickets, ended up in New Orleans, presented, got more feedback, fell in love with the methodology (and the community), and yes, back in Singapore still somewhat infatuated.

It's like what I always believe research to be... I used to always want to be a researcher, but an independent one, who studies anything she wants, just because it's interesting to her.

Master = Doctor = Teacher

I read this today and I am so inspired. I never knew this. That the Ph.D was supposed to mean an expert teacher. :) Yes, in the past having a Ph.D meant you were a good teacher. I hope this inspires me. I've always wanted to be a teacher. And now... I am indeed training to be one, because I do have an oral defense eventually coming up, where I get to "lecture" my examiners and "discuss" my work with them. Thinking of it this way takes the sting out of what traditionally would have caused a lot of fear in Ph.D students.

To this day, the names we give our university degrees and the rituals we attach to them reflect those fundamental connections between knowing and teaching. For example, the highest degrees awarded in any university are those of "master" or "doctor," which were traditionally interchangeable. Both words have the same definition; they mean "teacher." "Doctor" or "dottore" means teacher; it has the same root as "doctrine," or teaching. Master, as in school master, also means teacher. Thus, the highest university degree enabled its recipient to be called a teacher. (p. 196)

Consider the full current form of the oral exam. First, the candidate presents a brief oral exposition of the thesis. He then defends the thesis in dialogue with the examiners. These parallel the two modes of teaching: the lecture and the disputation. The oral examination is the ultimate test of subject matter expertise; it examines the candidate's ability to teach the subject by employing the dual method of lecture and discussion. (p. 197) 

Reference
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. In S. Wilson (ed.) (2004). The wisdom of practice: essays on teaching, learning and learning to teach (pp. 189-215) USA: Jossey Bass.