I'm in the process of reading a painstakingly boring paper. It's part of my course that is intended ot prepare us for our thesis proposal, research, and writing. This period we are learning about the philosophy of science. I've never taken philosophy before so was relatively interested in the subject, but my previous sense of optimism has eroded significantly. Of course their may be some good in studying philosophy, but at this stage I beleive that my classmates and I have much more to learn about logistics of our thesis (funding, travel, contacts, communication) and preparation for writing our proposals. Our philosophy course could be valuable if we had a good understanding of it, but we only have three sessions and cannot expect to learn enough in such a sort time to apply it to our research. I'm not interested in questioning the meaning of "I" or the meaning of "science." Another paper I read for this course had an example that I did find quite ammusing. It went like this, "All books on philosophy are boring. This book is a book on philosophy. This book is boring." It's an example of logical deduction. I would add that it's an example of brutal self-awareness.
Besides debating the meaning of me (is me my appearance, my cells, my thoughts, or my bank account number?) I'm researching for my possible thesis. I am still planning on writing about if agricultural change is a product of community or market factors and will probably find out if I can do it next week. My contact is not completely sure he'll be in the area next year so I'm waiting for his confirmation.
I think Amanda's lessons are going well although she has one really difficult class. I should return to my article.
Thanks for reading, Andrew