I haven't posted about my thesis work for a while now. I'm in the process of finishing up my thesis proposal, and specifically, I'm theorizing the somewhat different (that's putting it mildly) methodology that I'm planning to use. What has been hanging me up is what I consider to be a basic problematic paradox in a constructivist standpoint - what happens when we become so vested in our constructed reality and the contextualizing ground changes? [For those who aren't familiar with this line of reasoning, constructivism holds that there is no capital-T Truth or capital-R Reality aside from, say, physical existence that can be objectively known. Instead, we interpret events based on our individual and/or collective experiences and the effects of those interpretations have real consequences in our lives that comprise little-t truth and little-r reality.] I'm attempting to reconcile the paradox by using an argument from complexity theory that, in effect, grounds and theorizes constructivism in complexity terms. It's a complex argument (in both senses of the word) that has been vexing me for a couple of weeks now. Today, I think I've had a breakthrough and I've been constructing (anyone keeping track of the pun-count?) the argument.
I just went downstairs to the little food kiosk in our lobby to buy some high-carb, high-salt mental afterburner fuel (aka Doritos) for a last burst of creative energy. While I was down there I had an urge to grab an orange as well (the body knows to balance sodium and potassium, I guess). When the clerk rung up the two items, the total came to $2.22. "Very lucky number," she said in her Chinese accent. "In Chinese, 2-2-2 means easy, easy, easy. This is a very lucky number for you."
At last - a good omen for the thesis methodology, constructivist grounded theory with an emergent ground, about which I will post more when its ready.
[Technorati tags: valence theory | constructivism | grounded theory | omen | luck | 222]