The object.
2. Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this?
I think I hop from aspect to aspect within relatively loosely delimited projects until a sort of saturation is reached. This tendency possibly draws from the habit of getting-a-little-lost as way of dealing with the influence of preconceived notions and prejudices at the beginning and during learning and research. It also has to to do with the institutional arrangements around the projects, but I judge this to be quite complicated for the sake of elaboration here.
3. 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)? ...
I try to stay with the trouble/question.
4. What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it?
It depends; in what situation or case?
5. Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives?
I tend to over-impose.
6. Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument?
If I may read this question strictly, I don't see a tension, opposition, trade-off between generalization and overarching argument. Overarching arguments do not have be, or rely on, generalizations. Now if I say, okay, I know what you mean, then I think I have seen myself doing both with no tally or idea of amount. I can say however, that along with nourishing my STS literacy have come more checks on the way of my will to generalize and assessing general claims and proposal of others.
7. Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them?
Sometime it feels more risky that other times.
8. 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 don't think the latter can be a legitimate option!
9. 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?
Changeable. It might depends on availability of narratives or the sort of argument at hand.
10. 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?
That depends on my feeling and judgement about the person asking the question; whether that person is serious or gaming, and whether that person is open to response that games the presuppositions in the question.
