Twitter Word Association
March 2nd, 2009
This is what people on Twitter think when they hear the word ‘science’:
album association beaker bill bit blinded calm cool cutting deep discovery dolby dr due em entering excited fiction fine food fun game gets girl hat head hope immediate incubus interesting kiki kinda knowledge lab life living love mystery nye objective openness peace pops progress pyke reaction reason research sanford science science- scientist self-enclosed something sorry spaceships statement surprising swarms technology test think thomas tire touch truth truthless tubes understand universe vancouver white-smocks works world yay
created at TagCrowd.com
Filed under Esoterica | Comments (7)
7 Responses to “Twitter Word Association”
Leave a Reply
That is pretty interesting. I think it’s kinda cheating that people think of ‘science’ when asked about ‘science’ but some of the others are (maybe) telling?
I find most interesting are, ‘immediate’ and ‘reaction’.
Isn’t science supposed to be slow and methodical, unaffected by outside sources? 🙂
Fascinating… ‘truth’ and ‘truthless’ I can imagine… But, really, where do ‘tire’ and ‘swarmed’ come in? ;oP
On a saner note, though, I’m surprised that ‘doubt’ doesn’t show up on the list… nor do ‘experiment’, ‘experimentation’, or ‘demonstration’. What have those high school science teachers been doing!?!
It should really read, “Kiki’s followers on Twitter.” and the words “immediate” and “reaction” were in the question, if I recall correctly. Like it or not, some of those first thoughts are going to mirror the question.
Am I a weirdo – my association was ‘logic’
Neat site. Thanks.
Okay, on this site I guess it’s fair to assume some context and science-positive mind-set, and maybe this was a TED-ish thing? Still, it’s interesting that they _could_ have though,
“I do not love science” or
“I was blinded by Bill Nye for no reason” or
“They * eyes rolling * love science .” (Too much MadLibs in earlier life)
Context remains important. Was it Americans, who when asked to comment on slyly disguised core concepts taken from their (cherished!) Constitution, they were vehemently opposed such egregious proposals?
Shifting focus, I bet there were some interesting replies among the zillions. Any inexpensive way to float them up? Wonder what warped results we’d get from an “outsourced” exercise on that.
Oh, and thanks to pointing me to that “tag” site.
I can’t believe the word “method” (or “methodology”) isn’t in there. That’s what pops into my mind.
More accurately: this is what people on Twitter filter out of their brains and edit for public consumption when they think about science.
But I’m happy because I see “yay”, “excited”, “fun”, “cool”, “interesting”, “works”, and “reason”.
And, of course, “blinded”, as in “she blinded me with ~”. “thomas” “dolby” would be proud.
–Naomi