In reading my other classmates’ associative trails, it was interesting to see different perspectives on what associative trails are and how a browser search history is can similar to it.
I did feel like my post was dissimilar to Mirna‘s as she mentions that by comparing her search history to her trail of thoughts, she appeared to be more linear in thinking than what her indecisive nature led her to believe. This is because, agreeing with Helena, I believe that our thinking goes off on tangents, with one thought triggering another thought like a chain reaction. I think that the idea I am going to approach this stemming from the idea that we think faster than what we can process down physically. Like in our minds, we bounce around from thought to thought, with one thought easily triggering another thought in some sort of chain reaction as mentioned before. Yet through all the thoughts we come up with in our minds, we somehow learn to filter out our ideas and choose the best fit ideas for our trail of thought. I feel like this is where the associative trails comes in, or the search browser history. Our associative trails becomes our linear train of thought as we subconsciously filter out ideas that don’t fit in — that’s why it seems more organized that all the random ideas that bounce around in our minds.
Also, I agree when Colin says “I do not think the image encapsulates anything central in regards to my way of thinking” talking about how the search history seems too linear to be considered as our true trail of thought. While a search history could be good visual example of what associative trails are, I feel like it is limiting to what an associative trail really is. One has to try and comprehend the deeper meaning behind the assignment rather than taking it at face value. I feel like a better example would again be the reaction complex.
Overall, I liked how a lot of the posts I read were similar to mine or aimed to achieve the same trail of thought, yet all were worded in a different way. This, to me, is a good representation of how we all somehow have the same thoughts, it’s just the way approach the idea is different, which in turn can be due to our different knowledge capacities, experiences, values, etc.
In consideration of interpreting ideas through different perspectives, I agree that my original nugget post can be understood in multiple ways. One may approach this using a Mathematics discipline saying that there a multiple ways to achieve a specific number through the various equations that exist. For example, while 10 x 10 equals 100, 95 +5 also equals 100, and so does 220 – 120 as well.