Subj : Re: Rome
To   : alt.tv.farscape
From : John I
Date : Mon Aug 29 2005 16:15:06

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape

Tyler Trafford wrote:

> RR wrote:
>> Tyler Trafford wrote:
>>
>>>>> As is typical, I have little to say.  The show has intrigued me
>>>>> enough to watch more episodes, which I suppose means "it rocks"-ish.
>>>>
>>>> Trafford completely fails to mention Polly Walker's incredibly hot
>>>> nude scenes.
>>>>
>>>> I mean, like *WAY* hot.
>>>
>>> Too true, too true.
>>>
>>>> Out of respect (and ignorance), I will not speculate as to why this
>>>> is.
>>>
>>> The review *was* suspiciously short on facts.
>>
>> I suspect your mind was subconsciously[1] on other things at the time of
>> writing.
>>
>> [1] I often question my use of the various forms of word "subconcious".
>> Sometimes I see people using the word "unconscious" where it seems they
>> should use "sub". Does not sub = "beneath the thinking mind", while un =
>> "out cold"?
> 
> You are correct, sir.
> 
> I had a psych professor who said that whole idea of 'subconscious' or
> 'subliminal' was wrong, because there was nothing beneath the thinking
> mind.  (Besides autonomic reflexes, obviously.)

I think your professor was wack.  There are connections and expressions that 
get built without conscience thought all the time.  The creative process is a 
prime example.  How many times have we all had that moment when a great idea 
came unbidden.  Clearly unconscience (subconconscience, if you will) mental 
processes were at work making associations between concepts and memories 
before the idea was triggered and registered in conscience thought.

I think your professor suffered from the kind of right brained deficiency you 
get in a lot of PhDs.  They spend so much time and effort in higly congnitive 
and consciencely logical thought, and are divorced from their other more 
emotional mental sides, that they lose touch with important mental faculties.

Also "Unconscience" was used by Freud and Jung in much the same way we often 
use Sub-c.

.