Randomness is a lack of Knowledge in both Spiritual and Physical world.

My opponent uses an egregious misunderstanding as the basis of his argument. He asserts with no warrant or source that "By definition randomness is a lack of knowledge." However, this is simply incorrect. By definition, randomness is the state of being random, which in turn is: Random (http://dictionary.reference.com...) –adjective 1. proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern: the random selection of numbers. 2. Statistics. of or characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has an equal probability of being chosen. Nothing in this definition arises from lack of knowledge - for knowledge is (among other things): Knowledge (http://dictionary.reference.com...) –noun 1. acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition: knowledge of many things. As the reader can clearly see - a lack of acquaintance with facts, truths, etc... does not equate to a state of occurring or being made without aim or purpose. *************************************** Some responses: >> "If being scared is a fright of sudden randomness, not being able to understand something." This makes no sense. All times you are scared is because you are afraid of sudden randomness? >> "This will seem random because of your lack of knowledge on the matter at hand." Assuming this actually happened, this would seem anything BUT random - there was clearly an intention in the action. >> "By definition randomness is a lack of knowledge" False. >> "As randomness can be implied to both the physical and the spiritual world." Well of course... duh. Unless you mean "applied," in which case, you cannot APPLY randomness - if you purposely apply it - it's not random. >> "Like it would be physical to not understand the spiritual world, as spirits can act random to the physical world." Again - doesn't make sense. One cannot ACT random. Actions can appear random to others, even though they're not. And since you've presented no scientific evidence for these spirits, I have no way of judging their actions or the merit of the theory. >> "To a spirit a brick wall seems random, as to the spirit can walk right through the brick wall." Again - makes no sense - a brick wall is clearly a constructed object and would not appear random except to some very unintelligent spirit. >> ""Therefore believing in the spiritual world would be impossible. And therefore you will remain skeptical of God, angels and spirits in general."" Red herring - immaterial to the resolution. >> "The devil is hidden so that you would not know of God. But only has lead you into a trap of believing that only the physical world exists, therefore do what you wish." Red herring - immaterial to the resolution. ************************************** Once again, GodSands has written a lot of nothing, beginning with a false premise and culminating in the notion that somehow, randomness, a concept applied to a situation where specific a priori knowledge is in principle impossible, amounts to a lack of knowledge. Randomness is not by any stretch of the imagination a lack of knowledge. Randomness is a lack of organization. It is possible to examine that lack of organization and glean knowledge about it, but the randomness itself is not a lack of knowledge. My opponent will no doubt argue that the impossibility of gleaning knowledge counts as a lack of knowledge. However, consider that the knowledge is not impossible to get - it's merely impossible to get A PRIORI - which is exactly the same situation we find ourselves in with everything. A priori knowledge is impossible - as such, the argument that this constitutes lack of knowledge is nonsense. I look forward to reading and deciphering my opponent's rebuttal.