The Rorschach Test
The Rorschach Test | Buy Reprint Rights | License Candorville | Get Candorville In Your Paper | Buy Candorville BOOKS
July 10th, 2013

The Rorschach Test

Discussion (18)¬

  1. Dave Aronson says:

    It is indeed a Rorschach test — people see all kinds of things in it, that aren't there….

  2. Paul McGuire says:

    Didn't you mean "litmus test"? The litmus test is used as a metaphor for determining if a person is in one of two categories, because the chemical litmus test determines whether a solution is acidic or basic. The Rorshach test doesn't divide anything – it is an interpretation of an inkblot which can have any number of valid responses.

    • Darrin Bell says:

      No, I mean Rorschach test. To reiterate Dave's response (he beat me to it), Rorschach tests do divide people. They divide people who see ink blots from people who see butterflies just because the person testing them suggests there's an image in the ink blot.

    • bcmayes says:

      Actually a solution can be neutral and thus not cause either litmus paper to react. Thus the metaphoric litmus test is not a test of "which" but a test of "if," that is, does the individual meet one specific criteria.

      Just for completeness.

  3. jeff says:

    It is a tragedy when anyone is killed but I think the preponderance of evidence suggests that Zimmerman acted in self defense.

  4. John says:

    It's a test to determine how much you liked "Watchmen", right?

  5. Alan says:

    The whole thing is a terrible tragedy all around. I don't see how any good will come of it to anyone.

  6. chayafradle says:

    So, was Zimmerman's account an ink blot, or a butterfly? I think it was vomit spewed on art paper. Who will ever really know for sure? The biggest point that we can know for sure is that he was a JERK for taking matters into his own hands, and had a God complex thinking he was going to solve all crime in the world by himself, singly, by taking matters into his own hands. This guy had NO RIGHT to be carrying a gun. He is one of the BEST reasons for gun control ever!

  7. sadbuttru says:

    I do know what a Rorschach test is & I DO know what happened… senseless, avoidable death… I know what all the holes that lined up in the "swiss cheese model" that led to this senseless tradgedy? —no

    • Darrin Bell says:

      We know he'd still be alive if this guy never got out of his car with a loaded gun to stalk a teenager. But that's all we know. People on both sides talk as if they personally witnessed the whole sequence of events.

      • chayafradle says:

        Emotions can cloud memories. Also, what we see must be interpreted by our brains. This makes for a whole lot of unsure people who are POSITIVE they are right.

      • sadbuttru says:

        So true…ain't people always that way:
        1-pick a side,
        2-collect/create "facts" to support your position…

        All I'm saying is that unpaid stalking while you're packing heat is creepy & uncalled for {many other adjectives can fit in place of "creepy"}.

        Really need those Skittles in the afterlife, hope they're there…

      • sadbuttru says:

        If only both sides could have talked:

  8. Joe Mama says:

    I'm saddened and stunned by the verdict.

    • chayafradle says:

      Joe, what did you expect in Florida, where even elections are rigged? I'm glad, though, that there aren't a great deal of violent reactions, though. I have an idea… Maybe we should create a Trevon Martin Day of Remembrance?

      • Joe Mama says:

        Chaya, Bubbele,
        I fight my cynical urges with a desperate, wild, naive belief that this country of ours has a system of justice which is . . . you know . . . just. That the soul or our nation will no longer tolerate the wanton, causeless murder of a teen just because he is black. What did I expect? At the very least manslaughter.

  9. chayafradle says:

    Joe Mama, oy. Not everyone is a real mensch like you are! Also, the more pressure the Republicans put on states' rights , the further back that will take us into the era before civil rights happened. If this had happened in Los Angeles, then maybe it would have been manslaughter. However, I recently found out that the best paid defense attorneys can manufacture reasonable doubt by paying experts to testify for their case. In fact, they are paid to lie if they have to. If their reputation is a good one, the lies are believed. Maybe someone needs to pay attention to this tactic. BTW, poor people who can't afford a high priced attorney, won't have access to this tactic. I am fearful because now various states are starting to put into law measures that take away women's rights, and the supreme court refused to overturn them.