I had hampered my ability to write because I was too worried about the process behind the writing. Maybe the dissonance we feel when we write forces us to become better at solving the problems we encounter when we write. Maybe as we make breakthroughs in meaning we remember something of the process. Maybe as we try out and try on heuristcs like the pentad or the topoi or the tagmemic, we gain some kind of feeling or tacit knowldge about how a heuristic can change our perspective on a problem and in doing so the mechanical heuristic moves into the background and the motivation for solving the problem takes over, bringing with it tacit heuristics. But I think there is something that heuristics demonstrate that is more important than or at least as important as a problem-solving strategy, and that is the fact that the choices people make during the process of writing will largely determine the content of their papers, which means those choices determine the ultimate meaning or knowledge that writing produces.
Heuristics are terministic screens.
I think the idea that all successful writers have an invention heuristic, albeit often unconscious, is very important. The first day of class when FK put us on the computers and asked us to write a message describing our invention technique, I said my technique is to read, and then start writing. Although I often question why I choose to write this way, I do know that there is more of a heuristic there than I realize. When I was reading this article, specifically the part about goals, I was remembering my experience in the writing center last year. The WC, more than any other activity, helped me to understand the processes that I have internalized over the years.