(no subject)

[undauntra]

1. What sort of profession in the wizarding world would you choose and why?
   I wouldn’t settle down to a single profession. I’ve gone through three professions so far in real life, and I see no reason why the wizarding world would be any different, so I’m going to put forth three different professions that I might do in sequence, or all at once.
   My first profession would be enchanting. Somebody has to make all those Time-Turners and Remembralls and the like, and I think it would be an interesting way to explore the interactions of magic and engineering. I’d love to play with high-performance fabrics for invisibility cloaks, or carbon-fiber broomsticks. If I can come up with a marked improvement on the current state of the art, that would be wonderful. I’m not sure if wizarding law has patents, but I could publish and/or make a killing on the open market.
   I would also like to do freelance editing. Not just copyediting, but actual structural work where I have the chance to clarify and organize thoughts. Some sort of technical writing would be the best fit for this, rather than fiction. Perhaps I could edit a textbook revision to bring out underlying principles more than rote memorization. It’s a failing that I’ve noticed in some math texts in real life; the material is presented as a collection of separate techniques, when in reality all the different techniques are just special cases of understanding how equations work.
   Finally, I’d like to deal in antiquities. I’ve always been interested in the technologies of the past, and this would afford me the opportunity to study them up close and in person. In my lifetime, I’ve seen people experimenting to rediscover the techniques behind Damascus steel and granulation, and I’m sure there are many other ancient arts that have been lost, or at least temporarily misplaced. As a dealer, I’d have a lot of opportunities for travel to exotic places in search of artifacts, and I’d also be my own boss. (I hate taking orders from people who are less competent than I.) I’d meet all sorts of interesting people, both in the academic and business worlds, too.
   
2. You have to venture deep into the Forbidden Forest one night. Pick one Harry Potter character other than Hagrid and one object (muggle or magical), besides your wand, that you'd want with you.
   I would want Firenze as my companion for two reasons. First of all, his presence would greatly increase my chances of coming out of the experience unharmed. Any centaur knows the Forbidden Forest far better than even Hagrid does, and of all the centaurs, Firenze is the one most kindly inclined towards humans. In addition, the trip would be a wonderful learning opportunity. Since Firenze is also an expert on Divination, he would doubtless have much to share (about either Divination or the local flora and fauna) with a willing student.
   For my one item, I would bring a camera. Preferably magical, but it's not a big deal either way. Think of how weird and wild and wonderful the Forbidden Forest must appear by night, and so few people have had the chance to see its haunting beauty! When I was in Scouts, the first lesson I learned about the few remaining wild places of this world was "Take only memories; leave only footprints." What better way to take memories than by taking pictures? When I get back home, I can jot down notes about each picture, and then put them in a book for all the world to see and share in the experience.
   
3. If you had the opportunity to live forever, but your family and friends did not, what would you choose? And if you did choose to live forever, what would you do with eternity?
   What's the catch? Literary depictions of immortality all too often come with undesirable side-effects. Do I suffer increasing debilities of age? Am I unable to die even if my health fails or I am in incurable pain? It's important to check all the loopholes on opportunities like this.
   Assuming that there's no catch, of course I'd want to live forever; it's a pure benefit with no cost attached. It's not like my choice would cause my friends and family to die any sooner, as the question is presented. In the normal course of events, people outlive some of their family and friends all the time, but this doesn't makes life any less worth living. I've already lost my father, all of my grandparents, and two friends (one to a car accident, one to an OD) - yet life goes on. In fact, once time mellows the initial grief into a wistful sorrow, the memory of what was lost can make life all the sweeter. Overstuffed leather armchairs bring a smile to my lips because they remind me of Granddad. Moreover, losing friends and family doesn't mean being alone forever. I've joined new communities and made new friends. I've welcomed new family members by birth and by marriage. As long as there are people to meet, you don't have to be alone unless you want to.
   With all of eternity to look forward to, my foremost interest would be to see what happens next. We live in an age of wonders today. Humans fly through the air, communicate nigh-instantaneously across great distances, and view videos from Mars. Civil rights, though far from perfect, improve every generation. Infant mortality rates are down, literacy is up, and we're untangling the mysteries of the human genome. Human knowledge is advancing so far, so fast that it's no longer possible to become a true Renaissance man, to learn everything there is to learn - because it keeps piling up faster than any one person can assimilate it. (And oh, what if we learn to bootstrap our brains enough to catch up with the rate of research again? Wouldn't that be fun!) I want to see what glorious, mind-blowing advances my mad, brilliant, creative species comes up with next. I want to walk the soil under a distant sun, to shop for designer genes, to see what strange new creature humanity will become. It’s going to be a wild ride.
   
4. If you could travel back in time to one point, when and where would you go? Why?
   That depends on the details. Is this a one-way trip, or do I return to the modern day afterwards? Can I alter the course of history, or can I only observe? How much can I carry with me? Will I be able to speak the language when I get there? (And am I still living forever from the question above?)
   I have no particular desire to take a one-way trip backwards unless I'm already living forever, or at least being rejuvenated back to the age I was then; the future looks to be even better than the past, so I wouldn't want to waste any lifespan on living through the same years twice. A Peggy-Sue style do-over, on the other hand, would be much more intriguing - but I think that’s beyond the scope of this question.
   If it's a round-trip and I can alter the course of history, I'm going to read up on the stock market and sporting events, and go back just a few years to make a little money. It's all very well to talk about changing the course of pivotal battles or whatnot, but it would be awkward if I were to somehow undo my own conception and vanish in a puff of paradox - so I'm effectively limited to travel within my own lifespan. After tipping myself off on various gambling opportunities, I might go far away from past-me and drop an anonymous tip about 9/11, if I felt that I could do so without courting time paradox. Within my limited time window, it's the influential event most likely to be influenced by a single person with neither resources nor connections - and it wouldn't do to lean on my past self's connections when she's the one who would have to live with the consequences. It'd be interesting to see how different the world would be today with such a politically polarizing incident removed.
   If it's a round-trip but I can only observe, I'm hitting the pre-Columbian Americas with a video camera. I read this great book called "1491" about the pre-Columbian Americas (research for alternate history world-building), and it really drove home how little we know about what life was like in the Americas then - and how much of the conventional wisdom may be wrong. It’s controversial, though, so I’d want to go and see for myself. I'd like to collect evidence about it, and if I can bring anything back with me I'm taking breeding stock of an extinct species or two. Or three.
   
5. What HP character do you identify with most and why?
   I identify with Snape, but for all the wrong reasons. I was an inner-city public high school teacher for a few years, and I really didn't enjoy it much. Those few moments when I was actually teaching a willing mind were thrilling, but they were few and far between. (Tying the students together with yarn for a kinesthetic demonstration of graph theory is fun, but you can’t do it every day.) All too much of my time was taken up by crowd control, by coaching my colleagues through algebra that they should already have known, and by fending off entreaties from the coach to give his star player a grade that he didn't deserve. Snape was my guilty pleasure; he actually says all the horrible things that I daydreamed about saying to my more disruptive students and to my fellow faculty. His dramatic character arc doesn't do much for me, since I'm firmly in the "plenty of fish in the sea" school of romance, but his incredibly unprofessional behavior in a school setting fueled my personal revenge fantasies when I was teaching teenagers. I would never do anything so unprofessional myself, but it's certainly relaxing to read about.
   It’s actually kind of disappointing that I didn’t find any characters to identify with in a more positive light. However, I think that’s mostly because I happen not to identify much with the Trio, and it’s hard to identify with characters who don’t get much spotlight time, unless you start projecting your own qualities to fill in the gaps. Many fanfic authors do just that, so I find that I can often identify with fanfic interpretations of various characters - particularly Hermione - but only when they’re written out of character from canon. I was never the kid who studied for hours and wrote long essays; I was the one who didn’t need to study, but sat up front and made horrible math puns with my friends, then said “But we were talking about the subject matter!” when the (sexist) professor called us out for gossiping during class. Snape would have hated me.
   
6. What would you see if you looked into the Mirror of Erised?
   Three years ago, I would have said "a child of my body" in a heartbeat. My medical insurance had just refused to continue paying for further infertility treatments, and I was faced with giving up a lifelong goal. But I don't think I would see a child in the Mirror of Erised anymore. Infertility was once a heart-rending pain, but pain is often an opportunity for growth, and I'm not the same person anymore.
   Now I'm not so sure what I would see; instead of a singular goal, my desires are a whirlwind of passing fancies. Digging down, I return to the underlying end towards which children are a means; I want to see my species prosper. I want us to escape this gravity well and spread among the stars like a living plague of tool-using intellect. I'd like to say that if I were to look in the Mirror of Erised today, I would see the children of my species playing under a dozen alien suns.
   I'd like to say that, but honestly? I spend a lot more time twitching at misinformation online than I do thinking lofty thoughts. I'd probably see the internet collectively saying, "Hey, you were right and we were totally wrong. Sorry about that."
   
7. Do you believe that moral actions should be judged by the intentions behind them, or by the consequences they create?
   This question creates a false dichotomy between consequences and intentions, as if those were the only two criteria by which to judge moral actions - and as if they were mutually exclusive. Neither assumption is true.
   Let us consider the qualifications of a metric of morality. It seems reasonable to assert that the end goal of a moral metric is to discourage behaviors that are detrimental to the community of moral agents. To succeed in this, it must be both benign and actionable.
   Judging actions by intent fails the benignity requirement. Even if we accept that intentions are knowable through the application of Veritaserum, it is all too true that good intentions are no guarantee that the desired outcome is benign. There is a reason why the phrase "for you own good" evokes loathing. Examples abound of moral agents willfully doing harm for the victim's alleged good. We read in history books about tortures applied to persuade the victims to convert, or to confess their alleged sins - all with the intent of saving the victim’s soul. In modern times, all too often we indoctrinate or medicate young minds into blindly accepting authority rather than learning to think for themselves - but this too is done with the best of intentions in the name of education.
   Judging actions by consequences runs afoul of the actionability requirement. Actions often have unforeseen - and unforeseeable - consequences. Lending your brother the car might help him get to work - or he might skid on black ice and wrap himself around a tree. Abandoning your wife might leave her destitute - or it might be just the kick in the pants she needs to finally finish her degree. If two people make the same choice under the same circumstances but - by random chance - receive different outcomes, it is irrational to blame one but laud the other.
   With both metrics clearly lacking, let’s define a few more requirements before we go looking for a better solution. A good moral metric should also be impartial, in that it must yield the same results for the same action for all moral agents; it can't be biased in favor of one person over another. It needs to be extensible to all of society; for an action to be moral for an individual, it needs to be moral if everyone else did it too. (Consider this requirement in light of the tragedy of the commons. Although the impact of one person's action might be negligible, it is valuable to also consider the situation where everybody else also takes the same action. Incidentally, this constraint suggests a better way to look at consequences; instead of looking at what actually happened, look at the expected outcome in the statistical sense. Not the consequences for a specific instance, nor the consequences that some dunderhead expected, but the average consequences over a large number of trials.)
   It is also desirable for morality metrics to be internally consistent and sustainable. A hypothetical society where everybody behaves morally according to a given metric should perpetuate that moral metric in the environment for which the metric is proposed; otherwise, the metric is useless in the long term if it encourages future generations to disregard it.
   Personally, I favor a rights-based theory of morality. A rights-based metric may be imperfect, but is more satisfactory than either intention or consequences. An action is morally permissible if it does not infringe upon the rights of others without their consent. An action is impermissible if it does infringe upon the rights of others without their consent. It's not a very nuanced view - it merely differentiates between the permissible and the impermissible, without indicating which actions are not just permissible but commendable - but at least it avoids the grossest flaws of both intent and effect.
   Rights theory isn’t a simple panacea, though. I have not here I defined what a moral agent is, specified what rights a moral agent has, nor delineated how informed consent should be. There is plenty of room for disagreement and controversy based on those points, but that digression would be well beyond the scope of the original question.
   
8. What was your ideal job as a kid? Has that changed? What is your ideal job now?
   When I was a little kid, I wanted to be an astronaut. That dream shattered when I had to get glasses in second grade. (I'm given to understand that astronauts don't need perfect vision these days, but I was told back then that it was a requirement.) as an adult, I haven't figured out my ideal job yet. If I knew, I'd be doing it already.
   I have two problems with finding my ideal job: everything is more fun as a hobby than as a job, and everything gets boring after a couple of years. Even something that I love to do on my own would eventually become tiresome as a job.
   I enjoy working with both my hands and my mind, and I am still passionately in love with the stars. I think I would like to be a colonist on a new terrestrial world. As a colonist, I'd be fighting for the survival of my colony, not working for a demotivating paycheck. Specialization grows dull, but a colonist needs to be a generalist to survive. I'd have so many survival skills to master: hunting and slaughtering game, building shelter, making soap, smithing metal, canning preserves, dipping candles, farming, cooking, spinning, weaving, fulling, sewing, salt-curing meat, farming crops, ranching livestock... it beats the heck out of sitting in a cubicle.
   
9. If you were able to invent one spell, potion, or charm, what would it do, what would you use it for or how would you use it, and what would you call it?
   I would invent an all-purpose, information filtering and retrieval system with a user-configurable front end. As I mentioned above, the human race is generating content faster than it can be assimilated. Although the wizarding world lags behind the Muggle world in this, due to both a lower population and less pervasive media, it will certainly become an issue soon. A tool to filter through the infoglut for the parts of interest to you, with pruning for repetition, source reliability metrics, and simple back-tracing through citations to the primary source would be wonderful, and most of the components are already in place.
   We know from the Floo network that magic is capable of transmitting information and physical objects across arbitrary distances through a pre-established network. Between Howlers and Quick-Quotes Quills we have the means to go back and forth between spoken and written language, replicating as needed. (It should be simple enough to strip the artistic license from the Quick-Quotes Quill.) Tom Riddle's diary demonstrates that a textual medium can process input and respond to questions, while the Marauder's Map provides evidence that both realtime and pictorial display are possible.
   A project this ambitious naturally faces several challenges. The most critical challenge would be finding a way to process queries without using an (untrustworthy) Horcrux, of course. Fortunately, this project does not require the flexibility of a sentient AI; a purely algorithmic search would suffice, and such is probably within the capability of the lesser animations like those used in magical photos and portaits. It would also be desirable to greatly miniaturize all components, lest it require a metropolis of books and screaming Howlers on the back end. Some sort of automatic translation would be desirable to transcend language barriers. Finally, the initial data load of pre-existing texts would be painful. Rather than expending too much effort to streamline a one-time process teams of house-elves could simply be assigned to scan in books and periodicals.
   Monetizing the system would naturally be the tricky part. Although undeniably useful, its utility scales with the content available - and the Muggle world is still wrestling with the impact of electronic media on intellectual property law. Initially, I think I would offer it at cost to participating academic institutions in exchange for access to load the public domain materials from their libraries. Eventually, I'd like to offer it as a subscription-based service to private households and individuals with a one-time startup fee to cover addition to the network.
   On the content side, content spans a wide range. Some content is valued by consumers, who will pay for access to it. Other content (advertising) is valued by producers, who will pay to have it pushed out at consumers. These are not discrete categories; it's a two dimensional continuum that includes both ads so good that they go viral and embarrassing youthful attempts at poetry that even the authors want to burn. Rather than attempt to categorize content up front, I would arrange a licensing scheme where content owners are compensated based on use and user ratings, where all authors would share a fixed slice of the profits. There would be a nominal fee on the initial upload to discourage spam, plus the normal internal redundancy checks in query results. Users could rate content up or down (possibly with more nuance to accommodate "good but not what I was looking for" and other mixed ratings), and high ratings would both move an item higher in the relevant query results and increase their share of the total author-compensation slice. (Yes, this is partly inspired by the recent NHL CBA negotiations.) Bad ratings could drop the author's profit share to zero and cause their work to drop into obscurity. Authors would be permitted to pay a fee (comparable to the initial upload fee) to restore their works to a neutral rating, which would effectively act as advertising revenue. The more annoying the ads are, the more it would cost the producer to keep them in the public eye. Anything good enough to go viral could even turn a tidy profit.
   However, this business model requires considerably more work before making a final decision, since I’m just dashing down thoughts off the top of my head.
   What would I call it? Uh… what’s the Latin for “Google”?
   
10. If you were to face a boggart, what would it turn into? And what does it turn into when you throw the counter-spell, Riddikulus?
    I hate it when I am caught making mistakes, and I feel bad about a single incident for years afterward. Therefore, my Boggart would probably be a crowd of people whom I respect being disappointed in me or laughing at me. When I cast Riddikulus… I think it would still be a crowd of people laughing at me, only I would be making horrible jokes (instead of mistakes), so they’d be laughing at my jokes. “What’s black and white and Red all over? Pravda!” “What’s purple and commutes? An Abelian grape!” That would put me back in control of the situation.
    
11. What do you look for in a friend?
    First, a caveat: I look for several different traits in my friends, some of which are mutually exclusive. This is one of the reasons why it is good to have multiple friends; sometimes I need a friend to kick my ass into gear, but sometimes I need one who will feed me comfort food and tell me that everything’s going to be all right. The character traits that work best for each situation are nearly diametrically opposed.
    In all of my friends, I require enough intelligence to follow my trains of thought if I take the time to explain. I also require rationality and a personal code of honor; I don't have to completely agree with their code of honor, but they must have one. I find that this gives me a level of comfort with being able to roughly delineate bounds on their expected behavior. I look for a certain level of self-awareness and integrity; I expect my friends to do enough introspection to have an idea of who they really are, and to either be comfortable with themselves or work to change. I also look for at least one compatible activity or interest, because that gives us a pleasant way to spend time together. (I say "compatible" rather than "common" because it's possible to have complementary interests that still work together, like cooking and dishwashing. (I would be the one washing dishes. Trust me, you do *not* want to eat my cooking.) )
    There are also some qualities that I want somewhere in my social circle but don't require of all my friends. I want at least one friend that I have good creative synergy with, someone whose ideas feed my own creative impulses and vice versa. I want at least one friend with drive, ambition, and high expectations who can motivate me to achieve more than I would if left to my own devices. I want at least one friend with the compassion to comfort me when I'm feeling down, someone to be a safe harbor in the storm. Finally, I want my social circle to have near-complete coverage of my primary areas of interest, so that I have at least one person to talk with about any given interest.
    
12. What trait most annoys you about other people?
    For pure annoyance value? That’d be yelling at people who can't hear you while sitting right next to me. It drives me nuts because I'm the one getting a splitting headache, but the intended target gets off scot-free. It's injustice by gross negligence. The little people on the television can't hear you, nor can the other drivers on the freeway. Why torture me for their sins? (I am totally looking at my spouse here. Ahem.) There are many other traits that I would find more reprehensible and vile, but... "vile" wasn't the question. "Annoying" was. And I am totally not above nitpicking to take the chance to get that off my chest.
    
13. What do you think are your top five abilities or qualities?
    As a preliminary comment on this question and the next, characteristics are likely to have both positive and negative aspects. Since the goal of this exercise is to provide the voters with an impression of the applicant's entire personality, I will strive to incorporate the most salient characteristics below even if they have mixed implications.
    01. Honor: I keep my word. For almost a decade now, I have kept the secrets of a former friend who once confided in me. We had a falling out in which he slandered me to an entire social circle and physically threatened those who dared defend me. I still keep his secrets, even though I now hold him in contempt - because I refuse to be the sort of person who would betray a confidence. Similarly, I refuse to lie. That is not to say that a never have (though I wish that were true), but the number of times I have lied in my life can be counted on one hand, and each one haunted me for decades after. I do, however, delight in misleading with tone and omission under the right circumstances; it's a challenge to see how much I can distort perceptions without ever uttering a single falsehood.
    02. Brilliance: I'm a super-genius. Near-perfect standardized test scores, degree from one of the top universities in the world, speed-reader, yadda yadda. I finished B-school while working full time and got an award for academic distinction. I have studied foreign languages just for kicks. I qualify for the Prometheus Society. I have done multivariate calculus as a meditative practice. I know this makes me sound like a colossal braggart, and I apologize for that. I’m just not sure how else to say this.
    03. Pride: Yes, I list this as a positive trait. It takes a bit of explanation. First, the obvious: my pride drives me to excel. It's been a big motivator both in school and in my career; I'd probably be coasting in a series of dead-end jobs if I weren't too stinking proud.
    More subtly, pride is my sole impulse to altruism. Neither compassion nor appeal to authority move me. I have practically no empathy for anyone I don't know personally, and I know that authority is no guarantee of correctness. (Heck, I was raised in a country whose national origin mythos is rebellion against unjust authority; it's no wonder that appeal to authority is less than completely effective here.) I am, however, a prideful creature and susceptible to moral arguments from the age of Beowulf. Only the wealthy can afford to be generous; only the powerful can afford to be merciful. Because I think of myself as powerful, I strive to show mercy as a form of bragging. When I'm flush, I strive to be generous. I can also be influenced by philosophical arguments, but pride goes straight to the gut. I behave in ways perceived as good and selfless because I am just so awesome that I can afford to be gracious. (Plus, y’know, it’s good for the reputation.)
    04. Discrimination: I have standards. High standards. And yes, of course I judge you. I judge everyone I interact with - and you should judge everyone too! Judge me! Discrimination is a good thing, as long as you're discriminating based on valid criteria. I don't discriminate based on skin color, for instance - but I darn well do judge based on words and actions. We live in a world of wonders, lush with opportunity - but there's not enough time to do everything, to travel everywhere, to meet everyone. Opening one door closes another, and discrimination is how I optimize my choices to open more of the doors that suit my tastes.
    05. Openness: What you see is what you get. In some ways, I am less inhibited than most people, and I am open to discuss subjects that many people wouldn't. This is partially a deliberate choice influenced by the information age. As information becomes more and more freely available, privacy is harder and harder to maintain. Rather than living in fear that someone will find out my deep dark secrets, I choose to live without shame; I strive to do nothing I would be ashamed of, and to be ashamed of nothing I do. I'm not perfectly successful in achieving that goal, but I try.
    
14. What do you think are your top five weaknesses or worst qualities?
    01. Insensitivity: I have the empathy of a rock, and a particularly insensitive rock at that. What little empathy I do have is largely reserved to my nearest and dearest. It's not that I bear malice towards random strangers or fleeting acquaintances; it's just that I honestly don't care about them either way. It's inconvenient because networking would be useful for my career, but my lack of empathy makes me so bad at it. It didn't occur to me to send my boss a Christmas card until I got one from him first. On the flip side, it also means that I’m much less likely to get upset at other drivers because I view traffic as impersonally as the weather.
    02. Prickliness: I sometimes interpret words in the worst possible light, and I am prickly about my pride. I am quick to take offense at innocently intended statements, and I reflexively parse offers of help as veiled insinuations that I'm not competent enough to do something by myself. Moreover, my "fight or flight" response is weighted towards fight. I try not to start fights, because they're not the most productive tactic - but if someone else starts it, I don't back down. Because of this, I treasure the few friends with a light enough touch to warn me when I'm overreacting without setting me off.
    03. Frailty: I am frail in every sense of the word. My arms quiver when I try to lift anything more than ten pounds, I have to use my vacation days as sick leave because I get sick for weeks on end, and I'm horrible at dealing with stress. My coping skills pretty much nonexistent; I deal with stress by either snapping at innocent bystanders or hiding from the world, neither of which is productive. It really doesn’t help that I’d rather read or surf the internet than get some exercise.
    04. Laziness: The single thing I'd most like to change about myself is my lack of energy. There are so many things I want to do in this life... but not tonight; I'm too exhausted. This is probably at least partially due to insomnia, but having a physical cause makes it no less of a negative. This is why I am seriously underachieving my potential. Yes, I have a decent job - but compared to a classmate who got to pilot the Mars rover? I’m not trying hard enough.
    05. Perfectionism: I have a very hard time convincing myself to settle for good rather than perfect in my own work. I have a gorgeous mohair shawl that I never wear because I know where the missed stitch is, even if no one else can see it. When I set out to write original fic, I get bogged down in analysis paralysis during world-building as I research continental drift, glaciation, and oceanic currents. (Though it really was a fascinating topic, seeing how the Ice Ages connect to the configuration of continents...) I have been tempted to take up martial arts for decades, but I never start because I worry about making embarrassing beginner mistakes. My perfectionism holds me back from achievement.
    
15. Define in your own words the following key traits:
    
    • Courage: Courage is the acceptance of perceived potential or certain harm in pursuit of a greater goal. Experiments have shown that most humans are risk-averse; we would generally rather keep what we have than risk loss for the chance of equivalent gain. Courage is deciding that the goal is worth the risk, and stepping up to embrace the exchange. There is courage in risking rejection to ask your crush out on a date because the chance that they might say "yes" is worth it. There is courage in taking up arms because defending your country is worth the risk of death. The goal is not always a noble one; there is courage in bullfighting, because... okay, I don't know what bullfighters get out of it, but they must get something or they wouldn't do it. Maybe they get groupies? Sometimes, the loss is a certainty more than a risk, but it still worthwhile because the goal can be achieved even when you personally lose. There is courage in storming a pillbox so that your comrades have a chance to live. There is courage in speaking out against tyranny because the truth is worth your life. Courage is accepting the risk or the certainty of personal loss because *it is worth it*.
      
    • Loyalty: Loyalty is an ongoing relationship where you are willing to endure hardship for the sake of the other party. Loyalty is usually mutual, though it becomes very abstract in cases where someone is loyal to an organization or a cause rather than an individual. (This is one reason why I like fealty relationships; it's hard to imagine what hardship a corporation is enduring for the sake of your dental benefits, so it doesn't register to me as real loyalty. The word “dedication” might be better than “loyalty” for such situations.) As an ongoing relationship, loyalty is more than just one-shot sacrifice. Loyalty is going through life with the knowledge that someday, you might be called on to prove that loyalty, to endure that hardship - and being okay with that. Loyalty can be sacrificing your freedom by giving obedience to your patron, or it can be sacrificing resources to protect those whom you have accepted under your aegis. From a certain point of view, loyalty is a risk mitigation tactic; it spreads risk across more people, increasing the chance of hardship affecting any given individual but decreasing the impact because when catastrophe strikes, the people connected by a web of loyalty relationships will lend a helping hand.
      
    • Intelligence: Intelligence is the ability to absorb new data, analyze it for information, synthesize information into knowledge, and hook the knowledge into the conceptual frameworks that yield true understanding - and to do it all at speed on the fly. It's about one new fact setting off a domino cascade of deductions that lead to a startling new conclusion. It's about not bothering to memorize formulas because it's just as easy to re-derive them from first principles. It's not how much you know; it's how well you think - facts just give you more raw materials to work with in building internal models of the world. Although curiosity is not the same as intelligence, it is a natural ally; curiosity provides more grist for the mental mill, more data points on which to refine one's understanding of the universe.
      
    • Ambition: Ambition is the opposite of contentment. It is the niggling dissatisfaction that says "This isn't enough. I'm not happy. I could be more than I am." At its highest levels, ambition can be the pursuit of excellence, the goad that pushes the limits of human achievement ever onward. But at its lower levels, ambition can be as simple as setting your alarm early enough to make it in to work on time every day because you want to make shift manager at the fast food franchise. Ambition drives progress, but often at the expense of happiness; and ambitious man is seldom content, and often stressed out.
      
16. Name: Jennifer
    
17. Age: late 30s
    
18. Where did you find out about us?
    I honestly don't remember. It might have been fandomsecrets?
    
19. Do you plan on being active in the communities once you are sorted?
    I don't know yet. I have never joined a sorting community before, so I don't have a good feel for whether or not the activities would suit my temperament. I'll give it a try. If it suits, I'll participate. If not, I'll drop a comment on the appropriate leaving post. Life is too short to bring a sense of grim obligation to fandom.