Some things are neither determined nor random, in the "arbitrary" sense of the term. A child that grows up in a musical household is more likely to become a musician. That's neither random nor determined.
In populations, or over repeated instances, these can resolve to near deterministic results. At the individual level, they are more random seeming.
I wanted to propose "stochastic" as a better term, but apparently "random" and "stochastic" are synonyms. [1]
What it comes down to is that "random" to me has a connotation of arbitrary, unpredictable. Whereas "stochastic" to me suggests a deterministic process with random influences.
So maybe the sentiment is better expressed as making sure it is clear that deterministic and random are the two extremes of a continuum, rather than an either/or distinction.
[1] https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/114373/whats-the-di...
I think our language is lacking here. In technical terms, neither random nor stochastic imply evenly distributed. In casual conversation, "random" does.
"Emergent" may be a better term for what I meant. Randomness (in the casual sense) is an ingredient in a stochastic process leading to non-random, even effectively deterministic results.
The comment I was replying to:
"the inputs that drive that subjective feeling are still either deterministic or random."
The ingredients which lead someone to suddenly sing a son apropos of nothing (seemingly random/arbitrary) are the same as those leading someone to pull their finger away from a flame... seemingly deterministic.
Evolution is not distinctly either, which is my point.
A particular child growing up to be a musician, is either random or determined.
Maybe each child in a population is determined, or random, but at least you can analyze things at the population level.
I don't disagree with you, but I find more subjective meaning in the difference between normal cognition and metacognition, compared to viewing the system up close.