Crap. Beat to the Punch.

I can't bear to link to the NYT long article on my research topic. Makes me feel lousy. I know I should be pleased that much of what they "expose" is stuff I've already noticed, but still. One of the key problems of academia is trying to feel new and "fresh". I feel neither new nor fresh.

Just noticed that they have misspelled trials as "trails". I feel a little better.


Phenomenological versus the Empirical

I commented to someone on Friday night that I was really more interested in phenomenological data collection as opposed to being a strict empiricist. It made me realize that I need to clarify my terms a lot more -- for myself, more than anything. I see that clarification as part of getting closer to a personal research philosophy, which I wouldn't say that I have right now. Or rather, I have one, it's just not clearly defined. It's hard to sit down and make proclamations about research, research methods, etc. When glimmers of clarity come up, it's like the golden hour in filmmaking -- too good to pass up. Obviously, there are others who have written on this, and I'm not reading them, but I tend to like to frame my ideas and then seek out sources to figure out how others make sense of something. Perhaps all part of the phenomenological approach...

I am pleased with myself today. And it's only 8:30am.

Also, I realized that my nickname for my cat sounds vaguely like a new pharmaceutical drug, for a new non-specific ailment. I can already see the billboards plastered all over BART stations. It would be especially awesome if the billboards had huge photos of cats jumping with joy, further baffling consumers about the actual purpose of the drug. I still remember the "Purple Pill" full-station ads from when I lived here 6 or 7 years ago. That's how powerful pharma ads are. I have no clue what the purple pill is, but it dominated the station for quite some time.