The contemporary negation of subjectivity

[The Johnny]

In the first sense. By using the oh-so-frequent-cheesy-phrase that "if you could freeze time and count all variables you could determine the next ocurrence/effect....".

This in a certain manner has relation to Zen koans, in the sense that it has the appearance to be random BS just to look special, but has some ultimate correlation... (well not exactly, but this came into mind, probably on an non specific related thing... ill work on this later)

You are representing the "hard science" Dragon (in a non pejorative way), and that is always needed and useful for the one trying to make a point or support a theory.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

GA, I don't always agree with you, but your thoroughness and citations bring a tear to my eye and a lump to my throat. Can I just be a cheerleader for this thread? It's so beautiful.

Unless I'm miscounting, I only have one actual citation, plus a wikipedia reference for Korean Fan Deaths.

Also this thread has at least one other major author?

I  think I was drunk, forget about it.

[Golden Applesauce]

I am unaware of any controlled, scientific study which supports the idea that slips of tongue and lapses of speech reflect unconscious desires, as opposed to swapping phonemes or trying to think about two things and once and saying the wrong word out loud.

Broaching this subject again... more than evidence, it would be an explanation:

Before you go explaining something, make sure the effect actually exists - otherwise, you'll find yourself explaining why women have one less rib then men and why women who watch beheading while pregnant run the risk of giving birth to a headless child.

there is no "randomness" within the psyche, its all deterministic, but in a very complicated manner. If there was enough time, commitment and interest, you could say any "random" 5 word sentence and it could be determined a big part of your "personality". Can be done with numbers, but its WAY harder.

your proposition about phonemes is partly true, in the sense that its the path of least resistance to have something surface.

mmmm, let me pick this retarded example: if i really dislike some person that its name is "Zack" and im speaking about say, his research work, the most likely insult-slip that is gonna come thru would be "Suck". Having a lapsus saying "asshole" is too far off, and even in the worst case of lack of concentration it wouldnt happen.

Theres also different kinds of "slips"... anticipations, perseverations, deletions, shifts and haplologies.

Do you think that random association doesnt express your unconscious either?

I have to admit, I was kind of excited when you posted this (only now got around to answering) because one of my roommates' names is Zach, and I used to mess up his name all the time.  In my case though, I think it was more related to having met so many people at once in my first year of college.  There was another student about two dorms down, named Thomas, who I played chess with a lot (and also a strategy video game, although that was in a larger group.)  So in my second year at college, we all got split up into different buildings, but the three of us still met to play board games and watch television fairly regularly.  On these occasions, I would often call Thomas Zach and Zach Thomas.  This wasn't a case of not knowing their names; I'd known Thomas for a full year and Zach for longer (we went to the same high school.)  But for whatever reason, when I was speaking without thinking I'd sometimes mix their names up.  My theory is that since (during my second year) I rarely saw one without the other, they became associated in my brain and the attempt to retrieve one name in the excitement of an intense board game sometimes pulled out the other name instead.  I never mixed up their last names, and I was much less likely to exchange their names when I was only with one (or neither) of them (or when I wasn't trying to talk very fast.)  In terms of purely phonetic lapses I think I might have called him Sach instead of Zach once, dropping the voicing on the leading consonant.

And I am going to have to disagree with you on the determination of personality by having the subject say five "random" words.  I agree that people are pretty much incapable of saying a random word or making up a random number - but except in extreme circumstances, I don't think that that would tell you much about the person.  Current mental state, sure - if I were to try to think of five random words right now they would probably relate to psychology or the PD.com forum.  If I had a fixation on some thing, and it was never far from my mind, then my words might relate to that thing.  The words themselves will probably be related to each other in the subject's mind, but aside from that I don't really see how you can determine personality based on five words - there just isn't enough information.  The amount of information in a human brain is enormous - 100,000,000,000 neurons, each of which can have different activation thresholds, 1,000,000,000,000 synapses, each of which can have different strengths and neurotransmitters, and on top of that different concentrations of bazillions of hormones and other signalling chemicals, which may not be uniform across the brain.  You can't meaningfully extrapolate to that level of complexity from a mere five words.  I dunno, it just seems kind of like figuring out a person's personality bases on the numerology of their name or something.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "expressing your unconscious."  There are obviously many things about my own mind which I do not know, and I think we'd agree that by carefully observing your own thoughts and actions you can learn things about your mind.  But somehow I get the impression that you mean more by that than merely becoming cognizant of things one was previously not conscious of?

In the first sense. By using the oh-so-frequent-cheesy-phrase that "if you could freeze time and count all variables you could determine the next ocurrence/effect...."

But you aren't counting all the variables - just five lonely little words.  (I'm probably missing something here.)

[The Johnny]

...when I was speaking without thinking I'd sometimes mix their names up...  I never mixed up their last names, and I was much less likely to exchange their names when I was only with one (or neither) of them (or when I wasn't trying to talk very fast.)... 

Interesting coincidence that i picked Zack... its what i would call basic association, being the theme "close friends"... last or second names are harder to make slips with because they are less frequently used (unless you are creepy football jock or in the military), and the prescence of the right person for yhour usage of the right name "lends you a hand" in not confusing it due to symbolical and visual association...

And I am going to have to disagree with you on the determination of personality by having the subject say five "random" words.  If I had a fixation on some thing, and it was never far from my mind, then my words might relate to that thing. 

well ok, ill admit i over-run my mouth a bit when im arguing thru written form in a forum (i dont know if its strange, but this is the only forum i have participated in, the few others ive followed ive only lurked... and also ive only started writing down my thoughts or theories for about.... 6 months... i dont count taking notes as "writing"...)

ANYWAYS - ok, my proposition that determining personality thru 5 words was arrogant... usually it does just show your current mental state... although when you get someone to perform free asociation with pictures, tis much more easier (if they dont fall into defensive mode and just say the friggin colors of the image)...

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "expressing your unconscious."  There are obviously many things about my own mind which I do not know, and I think we'd agree that by carefully observing your own thoughts and actions you can learn things about your mind.  But somehow I get the impression that you mean more by that than merely becoming cognizant of things one was previously not conscious of?

This relates again to free association, but if i understood correctly, you do agree that "random" words and numbers arent random (even do, that to decipher what they mean is a hard thing to do)

Sidetracking a little - but in relation to "randomness" and language - if language is in a sense a set of symbols to express something to someone else... anything you wear, that you have chosen, shows a lot of yourself...

Clothings, piercings, hair-do's and cuts, facial hair, accesories, tattoos... i think that profiling with these elements can be very useful.. the easiest example i can think associating something visual with a personality trait would be: anti-social personality with piercings and also shaving parts of your head-hair, while growing the facial ones.

Voice tone can say a lot.

Ive personally experimented anticipating personality traits based on visual appearance, voice tone and hearing a short conversation about whatever. I personally think that you can get a good grip on who is someone within 5 minutes, given that i have a chance to see all these traits. (most of this is in reference to restating more structured my previous statement)

[Golden Applesauce]

The thing to be careful with when describing personalities based on how the people choose to present themselves is to remember that different cultures have different "languages" of personal presentation - a Buddhist monk shaves his head to indicate something very different than a Neo-Nazi who shaves his head.  A priori you can't associate a shaved head with either non-violence or violence at every opportunity; you need to know which culture the person comes from - and whether they're being "truthful" in the language of appearance.

Personal appearances, inasmuch as they are intentional, can also be "faked."  Anyone can dress in the manner associated with honesty or virtue without being honest or virtuous themselves, or can pretend to be more rebellious than he really is by wearing the appropriate t-shirt.

The interesting thing, I think, are the appearances that aren't intentional.  I used to dress terribly, not as a way of expressing myself, but because I lacked an appreciation for how others viewed me and interpreted my appearance.  So that kind of fashion represents ignorance of the inner workings of others, which you can run with in all kinds of ways with psychology / psychotherapy.

I agree that you can get a good surface idea of a person in a good 5 minute conversation - judging other people is one of the things that humans as a species have evolved to do well - with the proviso that deeper personality issues - basic motives and drives, foundational beliefs, worldview - might not necessarily come out in a single typical conversation (although a conversation designed to get that kind of information, like one conducted by a skilled therapist, might.)