Category Archives: Thought Vectors

Concept Experience Activity: Using our Primary Nugget

An example of what our interconnected web of thoughts may look like.

When beginning this concept experience activity, I did just as the assignment described to do. I placed “Analyzing the Obvious” at the top of my page, and the most obvious thought that came from my Primary Nugget was that Humans think holistically.

Honestly, trying to figure out captivating research questions becomes a struggle for me. Often I question if there are enough questions for my one research topic can answer and possibly talk about. Instead of first thinking about an initial research question and using the web, I decided to just begin thinking about my statement and seeing what new ideas I can apply to it holistically on my own. With each new question that triggered in my mind concerning my topic,  I would write it down. Once I could not think of anymore questions on my own, I went back to the top of the list and start gathering ideas of that question on the web and do so forth going down the page.  However with all this newly gathered information, I am still having trouble in determining a specific research question.

Nevertheless, I find it interesting that the way I connected and continually asked myself questions pretty much in the same way of how I wanted to make the point in my statement that humans think holistically. I further learned that holistic thinking involves making connections between ideas and taking it to the next level by creatively and intuitively figuring out ways to ask yourself more questions. Holistic thinking is also not about forcing connections, but it’s about searching for those connections. By finding topics that cause a spark within us, we tend to create an overflow of connections without even trying. Furthermore, by engaging ourselves in thought and focus, the more it allows us to exhibit a deeper, fuller understand of what we’re thinking of. Finally it creates a positive cycle of interconnected holistic thoughts as further engagement helps strengthen the web of thoughts.

Nugget: Man-Computer Symbiosis

As has been said in various ways, men are noisy, narrow-band devices, but their nervous systems have very many parallel and simultaneously active channels. Relative to men, computing machines are very fast and very accurate, but they are constrained to perform only one or a few elementary operations at a time. Men are flexible, capable of “programming themselves contingently” on the basis of newly received information. Computing machines are single-minded, constrained by their ” pre-programming.” — Man-Computer Symbiosis, J. C. R. Licklider

Often times people become too dependent on technology and what the computer can do for us. While the computer has greatly evolved over time, we are continually finding more and more advances and conveniences that it can offer for us daily. This statement was very intriguing to me because as amazing as the computer is with all its functions can offer for us, this statement aims to describe the true limitations of a computer. While the computer maybe faster and more accurate, it does not have the ability to adapt to changes nor the capacity to learn on its own. The computer thinks very linearly, like an equation, and knows merely as much information as it is programmed to know. Yes, man may be slower in processing its information; but in contrast to the computer, man does have the ability to adapt to change and has the capacity to learn on its own. With each new or habitual encounter man comes across, a man’s memory allows him almost an infinite storage of information that he can subconsciously and self-sufficiently store in his memory bank for later use. Man is also self-functioning and self-sustaining, while a computer must be told what to do.

My interpretation of this passage is important because how relevant it is to my selected passage found in Nugget: As We May Think. If we functioned like computers, we would never be able to gain new information so that we could holistically make connections between these new ideas and incorporate that with knowledge we already have. As self-thriving humans, we were born as learners, thinkers, and innovators. It is our ability to learn from experience to gain new knowledge; our ability as thinkers to process that knowledge; and our ability as innovators to easily figure out how to adapt into and out of any situation we are placed in as we prepare ourselves for each new encounter we may come across.


EDIT:

This statement aims to describe the true limitations of computers that we are blindsided by daily. While the computer has greatly evolved over time, we are continually finding more and more advances and conveniences that it can offer for us daily. Yet with all the positive aspects of it, people often times abuse it and become too dependent on technology. As DCAT says, “while it is something that should be integrated into the world it should also be used in moderation.” This statement was very intriguing to me because as amazing as the computer is with all its functions can offer for us, do we, as a society, ever think about how much more we can do for ourselves than the computer offers for us?

While the computer may be faster and more accurate, it does not have the ability to adapt to changes nor the capacity to learn on its own. The computer thinks very linearly, like an equation, and knows merely as much information as it is programmed to know. Yes, man may be slower in processing its data; but in contrast to the computer, man does have the ability to adapt to change and has the capacity to learn on its own. With each new or habitual encounter man comes across, a man’s memory allows him almost an infinite storage of gained knowledge that he can subconsciously and self-sufficiently store himself for later use. Man is also self-functioning and self-sustaining, while a computer must be told what to do.

My interpretation of this passage is important because how relevant it is to my selected passage found in Nugget: As We May Think. If we functioned like computers, we would never be able to gain new information so that we could holistically make connections between these new ideas and incorporate that with knowledge we already have. As self-thriving humans, we were born as learners, thinkers, and innovators. It is our ability to learn from experience to gain new knowledge; our ability as thinkers to process that knowledge; and our ability as innovators to easily figure out how to adapt into and out of any situation we are placed in as we prepare ourselves for each new encounter we may come across.

However, reading through Zahra’s Man-Computer Symbiosis post, it causes me to want to clarify my stance on the use of computers vs. the thoughts of man. Zahra mentions that “by pairing the two [man and computer] together, a synergy is created that can lead to endless possibilities,” and I can see where some truth can come from this. While I do not think that the computer holds us back completely from creatively thinking and processing the ideas ourselves, I think that being used in moderation, the use of the computer can be incorporated into the way we holistically think. Sometimes it can further offer us new sources of information that allow for more thought-provoking ideas we were initially unaware of.


SN: I noticed that in ewingjm2‘s Man-Computer Symbiosis post, the following quote was used:

“The tree and the insect are thus heavily interdependent: the tree cannot reproduce wit bout the insect; the insect cannot eat wit bout the tree; together, they constitute not only a viable but a productive and thriving partnership”. — Man-Computer Symbiosis, J.C.R. Licklider

Reading through his post, it was very thought provoking to me as I was able to link this quote to my explanation of holistic thinking found in Nugget: As We May Think. I liked the way he was able to relate how the tree and insect are interdependent similar to how the mind and body were interdependent too. Thus it reminded how all of our thought processes are interdependent of one another and without each other, our thoughts wouldn’t be as wholesome, filled with creativity and perspective.

Although this does not provide much to edit to my original post, I like how it still relevant to both my nugget posts and can be used as further supporting text.

Dreaming with Groupthink

When creating my Reporting My Dream post, I made the mistake of not narrowing down my internet interests and commenting on why I like each one. However, as Jessica Ewing categorized her internet interests  to her two main features, I’d like to do the same.

I like the internet because it offers me two sets of different perspectives. The first perspective is that it offers me is an outlet to keep up with the world – whether it be with  keeping up with the people I have encountered during the course of my lifetime or with current events and world news. This is where I like using Facebook and Twitter. The second perspective is the ability to take a step back from all of these worldly influences and focus on myself and what my interests are, which is what Tumblr and Pinterest allow me to do.

Reading through my peer’s posts, I noticed we had similar digital objects, if not the same ones. I even learned that some of the things they mentioned in their own “Reporting the Dream” posts were things that I too use my digital objects for, yet failed to report. It was also interesting to see their different perspectives of the same digital objects too. Which brings me why I would like to study my own digital objects – it is because I feel that I can better understand and elaborate on the sources of digital objects through my own perspective and experiences using each individual site.

Reporting My Dream

In my previous post, What Will I Dream?, I posted various sources of Social Media I tend to find myself on. While there are obvious reasons for what these internet sources can do for a person, the reasons of how people use them  and why they like to use them is different among person to person. Again, it has to do with the idea of experiencing the world through different outlets and through different perspectives.

I find myself on lots of social media sites because I tend to be a people person and usually find myself engaging in a lot of social events interacting with lots of people too.

I like to use Facebook because it allows me to keep up with those I’ve met and continue to keep in constant interaction with them.  I believe that there’s a reason why we’ve crossed paths with those we’ve encountered during our lifetime. Whether we ended up as the best of friends or merely as acquaintances, I feel like in someway or another they’ve had some affect on shaping our daily lives.  In addition, I’m also a strong advocate for networking. I am definitely one of those people who agree with the saying that it’s not about what you know, but who you know. I like to keep up with people because you never know what someone can do for you and what you can offer them. Based on culture and my upbringing, I am also very family oriented. My parents come from very large families – my dad having 12 siblings and my mom having 4. With many aunts, uncles, about 60 first cousins, and with all of us living in different parts of the world, I can continually be part of their lives no matter where we are. Furthermore, for myself, I think it’s not necessarily always being in the know with what’s happening in people’s lives, but more so because I find myself genuinely caring for others and making sure that everyone in my life is content and in some sort of well-being.

I like to use Twitter because I feel like it’s sort of like a compilation of Facebook statuses posted in real time. By real time, I mean that when tweets are posted, it’s actually posted as a chronological timeline. I feel like the study of people is interesting, and Twitter offers a range of your followers’ emotions, thoughts, and perspective on the world happening around them.

I like to use Tumblr and Pinterest because of the creative outlets each provide. Scrolling though, I find myself day dreaming of the possible things I can accomplish with my life, whether it’s in short term or long term goals. For example, I have a strong affinity for traveling. I like to use the idea of traveling to motivate me to save my money for the experiences I could possibly encounter rather than on physical objects that offer short-term gratification. Or as draining as classes can get, it also motivates me to finish school so I can one day travel the world after I graduate as it will hopefully allow me to have the funds to travel as well. Going through both sites, it allows me to continue to motivate myself as I sort of prepare myself for the all possibilities I could discover in the world.

 

What Will I Dream?

I like the internet because of how convenient it is to keep up with the world, yet I don’t like how sometimes it keeps people from experiencing the world itself. Regardless of the fact that I don’t like to let the internet set me back, as I like to see myself as more of an explorer – I still use lots of social media to keep up with family and peers because sometimes I’m still limited to how much I can do.

Some social media I find myself on is …

Screenshot 2014-06-15 at 9.28.20 PM

Facebook,

Screenshot 2014-06-15 at 9.30.45 PM

Twitter,

Screenshot 2014-06-15 at 9.40.56 PM

Tumblr, and

Screenshot 2014-06-15 at 9.39.06 PM

Pinterest.

Connections between Associative Trails

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.

Associative Trails: “As We May Think”

Screenshot 2014-06-12 at 9.23.42 PM

 

Why do I have a picture of my browser history? Well, this screenshot can serve to be a sample of my own personal snapshot of my associative trails made while reading Vennar Bush’s “As We May Think” in order to compose Nugget: As We May Think.  An associative trail, as described by Bush, is a way creating a linear form of thoughts that leads from idea to another and can be put in some sort of an index that can be referenced later on.

Once I thought of one possible idea of a potential nugget, more relevant ideas popped into my mind there on after allowing me to further expand on my ideas even more.  Conceptualizing my primary text for the nugget post, I was able to reference the ideas I already had thought of from my index and then organize my trails to fit in with the main idea I wanted to present.

When looking up ideas to back up my chosen nugget, I used reference words on Google  that helped link one idea to other relevant ideas. And like a series of reactions, it further triggered more and more relevant ideas. This is similar to how my associative trails reflect my thought processes. My associative trails are a long list of ideas branching off of different ideas that can be found in my memory index and referenced for later use.

I would categorize my thinking regarding the primary text in terms of the disciplinary focus of Chemistry. As I had mentioned in the nugget post, one of the reasons why I was intrigued by this text was because it reminded me of what I tell others of why I chose to become a Chemistry major. As we can’t possibly appreciate and understand the world through one perspective, we can’t possibly fully understand Chemistry without the knowledge of Biology, Math, and Physics too.

 

Nugget: As We May Think

“The repetitive processes of thought are not confined however, to matters of arithmetic and statistics. In fact, every time one combines and records facts in accordance with established logical processes, the creative aspect of thinking is concerned only with the selection of the data and the process to be employed and the manipulation thereafter is repetitive in nature and hence a fit matter to be relegated to the machine…If scientific reasoning were limited to the logical processes of arithmetic, we should not get far in our understanding of the physical world.” –– As We May Think, Vannevar Bush

 

In Vannevar Bush’s “As We May Think,” he creates extensive analogies of science and innovation relating it to knowledge and the way we go about attaining and understanding that knowledge. In this passage, Bush aims to explain that thought is never linear, meaning that it never originates from one idea nor does it ever lead to just to one other idea. This is because our brains are like an interconnected web of knowledge, ideas, experiences, perspectives, morals, values, etc. which all contributes to how we think the way we do. The beauty of the idea of thought is that it is holistic, which according to Google means  “characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole.”  Our ideological way of thinking is holistic because it can, for example, be based off of our experiences, then refined by logical processes using the current knowledge we already have and/or by the morals and values we uphold, and fueled creatively by our curious nature to put the idea into different perspectives. Furthermore, our thoughts are never stationary as they become manipulated by new experiences and as we put them into even more different perspectives.

This passage resonates with me not only because it was not only something I agreed with, but also because I was intrigued by how it related back to me personally. First off, it reminded me of the academic program I was apart of in High School in which one of  its goal was to provide each student with a holistic education.  Thus, for example, we had to describe how what we were currently learning in one classes related back holistically to the other subjects we were currently learning in other classes. It also intrigues me because it reminded me of the explanation I offer for when anyone ever asks me why I chose to be a Chemistry Major — because it explains the Biology and incorporates Mathematics and some Physics as it offers a deeper analysis of science — which I feel is a holistic way of looking at the idea of Chemistry itself.

What it looks like when I think.

While a lot of people tend to tell me that I over think way too much — that’s definitely something I can’t argue with because I know it’s true. I like to think of it as self-analyzing my thoughts and organizing them into ideas that support my morals, values, and lifestyle. I tend to be an organized, structured person, and I’m also a Chemistry major as well, so I’m pretty sure my over-analyzing nature fits in perfectly with who I am and what my interests are.

As some may not think before they act, I’m the type that actually sits there and thinks about the plausible action at hand thoroughly before actually acting upon it. I tend to really use my conscience to analyze the pros and cons of the consequences that may occur in each decision I make.  Sometimes my thoughts may run off on tangents and/or I may come off as being scatterbrained, but having each possible scenario or consequence laid out in my mind allows me to somehow see what I’m working with in order to better organize my thoughts all together.