If I can't even write a simple 4 page paper how the HELL am I also going to get two 20 page papers and another 10 pager written over the next two weeks :(
Well, flit, thanks for putting things in perspective. I've got it easy- 10 minute psych presentation tomorrow and 8 page paper on water in 2 weeks. NO PROB
this fiction/nonfiction paper Steph ...and one of those 20 pagers is also for the same course and haven't even STARTED that... although at least I have a topic for that one (I think)
this one, just can't seem to settle on a topic ... I write a page, then decide it isn't working and throw it out and start again
what I WANT to do is look at the ways that theorists are employing computer technology to describe their theories about fiction, whether they are stating it explicitly or not
THOUGHT I could start from a footnote in the one essay .... “Truths are a digital resource employed in an analog world” (Rescher, 405) ...a lovely little aphorism that could be unpacked in a 4 page paper using the novel I presented on, don't you think?
Can't seem to make it work though
I did one o' those talks just this week, Melinda... this is to be a paper to follow it up ...should not be this ****** hard
Work on your psych paper. Put it to bed. Send me a list of potential topics; I'll pick one and boss you around and then, if you don't like it, you can blame me.
theorists go on and on about possible worlds... fiction creates possible worlds ... but possible worlds of fiction can only be digital ... on or off/true or false... if something is stated explicitly about an object in fiction it is true, otherwise it is false - if it ain't there you can't know it blah blah blah
in the real world, the concept of "truth" is less on/off ... there is more room for gradience - hence analog .... can be mostly true or mostly false depending on blah blah blah ...
Just start writing and stop throwing things away. Just keep it all and see where you go. If you don't use the other starts now, they can be useful later. Make an outline of what points you want to hit and see if you can write between them. Meditate for 10 minutes first -- if you're angry that decreases blood flow to the brain. Relax just just write and don't worry about where it's going at first.
Embellish...embellish...embellish the ever livin' hell out of it and fill with fluff! Kind of like I do all the time when I turn 'Hello' into a full paragraph. Just think what you can do with all that intelligent stuff yor lernin'.
Um, would starting with some kind of outline be helpful? I would never be able to write a 20-page paper without one. I don't think just sitting down and writing using some sort of free-form mind thing is going to make it for such a large paper.
my most recent one was on My Life as a Fake by Peter Carey ...and the ~children~ who don't like me basically heckled me and argued every point all the way through ... they were ~oh so charming~
Your list is confusing. No wonder you're stumped. How about this:
Which is more "fictional", an historical novel that doesn't adhere to actual cultural or historical accuracy or a speculative novel that uses the made-up world to highlight an existing cultural issue?
it has to be somehow related to either/both of the seminars I gave Stephanie
the thing that most interests me is how much overlap there is in terminology .... Oatley actually explicitly states in HIS papers on the psychology of fiction that fiction is like a computer simulation
Dolezel and Rescher and those other dudes do not draw any direct parallel ... at least not overtly ... but they're talking about schemata and scenarios and instantiations and truth claim (logic) and digital/analog
the thing that most interests me is how much overlap there is in terminology .... Oatley actually explicitly states in HIS papers on the psychology of fiction that fiction is like a computer simulation
It plays on both your strengths. Don't think about it too much, write it, even if you hate it, then set it aside. Work on something else afterwards, then go back later this weekend. If it's still bad, you'll have a better idea why. Right now, you're too close to it to regard it objectively.
Fiction is like computer simulation. University of Toronto professor Keith Oatley uses the metaphor of computer simulation to explain reader response to fiction. Oatley argues that Aristotle’s term, mimeses, should be interpreted not as imitation or representation of the actual, as these are too limited, but rather as simulation (Oatley, 65). Aristotle’s notion, he suggests, was that “a play is not so much an imitation – it is a simulation of human actions.... the play must run on the minds of the audience” (Oatley, 66). Although Nicholas Rescher, in “How Many Possible Worlds Are There?” does not explicitly draw the connection between fiction and computer technologies, his arguments for schemata and scenarios, as opposed to the terminology of possible worlds theory also strongly supports the argument that fiction is like computer simulation.
You can do this Flit. Ne ver doubt yourself for a minute. Since I have been on gather, I have seen you go from a student, to the master of both teaching and learning. I know you are awesome. Time for you to think that too.
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
Please select the part of the post you are reporting.
Please select why you are reporting this content.
Please enter a description.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 64
Good luck, Flit.... : (
this one, just can't seem to settle on a topic ... I write a page, then decide it isn't working and throw it out and start again
what I WANT to do is look at the ways that theorists are employing computer technology to describe their theories about fiction, whether they are stating it explicitly or not
THOUGHT I could start from a footnote in the one essay .... “Truths are a digital resource employed in an analog world” (Rescher, 405) ...a lovely little aphorism that could be unpacked in a 4 page paper using the novel I presented on, don't you think?
Can't seem to make it work though
I did one o' those talks just this week, Melinda... this is to be a paper to follow it up ...should not be this ****** hard
Perhaps her growth chart?
thanks for the smiles though
Head circumference, weight, height?
in the real world, the concept of "truth" is less on/off ... there is more room for gradience - hence analog .... can be mostly true or mostly false depending on blah blah blah ...
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just a thought.
my most recent one was on My Life as a Fake by Peter Carey ...and the ~children~ who don't like me basically heckled me and argued every point all the way through ... they were ~oh so charming~
Which is more "fictional", an historical novel that doesn't adhere to actual cultural or historical accuracy or a speculative novel that uses the made-up world to highlight an existing cultural issue?
keep throwing those out and starting over too :(
the thing that most interests me is how much overlap there is in terminology .... Oatley actually explicitly states in HIS papers on the psychology of fiction that fiction is like a computer simulation
Dolezel and Rescher and those other dudes do not draw any direct parallel ... at least not overtly ... but they're talking about schemata and scenarios and instantiations and truth claim (logic) and digital/analog
the thing that most interests me is how much overlap there is in terminology .... Oatley actually explicitly states in HIS papers on the psychology of fiction that fiction is like a computer simulation
It plays on both your strengths. Don't think about it too much, write it, even if you hate it, then set it aside. Work on something else afterwards, then go back later this weekend. If it's still bad, you'll have a better idea why. Right now, you're too close to it to regard it objectively.
Here's why.
and prove it... hmmm.... it is a single clear position
if there's no input nothing happens
runs on truth claims and if statements ... if this is true then .... else....
I really need to start making more of an effort to develop a relationship with her or getting through the whole MRP thing is going to be a major drag
No worries. You can do it. And when it's done, you can celebrate.
Fiction is like a computer simulation
Here's why .... mapping in Inspiration again, if nothing else
Fiction is like computer simulation.
University of Toronto professor Keith Oatley uses the metaphor of computer simulation to explain reader response to fiction. Oatley argues that Aristotle’s term, mimeses, should be interpreted not as imitation or representation of the actual, as these are too limited, but rather as simulation (Oatley, 65). Aristotle’s notion, he suggests, was that “a play is not so much an imitation – it is a simulation of human actions.... the play must run on the minds of the audience” (Oatley, 66). Although Nicholas Rescher, in “How Many Possible Worlds Are There?” does not explicitly draw the connection between fiction and computer technologies, his arguments for schemata and scenarios, as opposed to the terminology of possible worlds theory also strongly supports the argument that fiction is like computer simulation.