@boagie,
The question I have here even though I did not state it clearly is which drawing of lines is a more accurate representation of randomness, if any are at all. I mean, if one is interpreting the deterministic decision making process you mentioned before boagie, then that's as linear to the mind as you can get, and therefore not random, yet random to the sensory input!
And the other line drawing, depicting the conscious thought, is linked to causation and therefore cannot be random but in fact display a functional symmetry in the very "attempt" to be random. Does this line drawing occur as random to the brain?
So what I'm saying is that decisions in which randomness or "anomalies" seem to appear that do not seem in accordance to the 'supposed-to-be" behaviour are just part of a dualistic trait. In a sense that the brain and the mind have mutual, reciprocal order. The order for self preservation which is inherent for subconscious actions cannot be such for higher levels of thought, being that of consciousness.
In a setting of social interaction where subconscious thought becomes more and more latent, there is need for new order in decision processes to be contrived so as to still get that fulfillment of self preservation. Certain ironic behaviour would actually constitute for the intrinsic needs, based on the need for higher complexities of information (paralleling the higher level of organization aka social interaction). We as humans didn't start out living in these huge urban societies.
It's kind of like switching of perception to a higher level, like that of types of reactions; from nuclear to chemical.