Predestination is theoretically defined as an action or event or a multitude of circumstances that have been willed by God, a supreme or higher authority, or consequentially a superior plane of consciences.
Externally predestination is often explicitly and unequivocally in opposition to and incompatible and in contradiction to the theory and practice of human free will, as well as the notion of randomness.
Human free will garners the capacity to determinate, discriminate, make distinction, judgment and choice, metaphysically or other wise. In the realm of human free will is there a dispute or is there the presence of occupancy, coexistence and inevitability of the predetermined factor, or does it dwell divergently within an independent domain?
Randomness is thought to be the execution of an act that is unintentional, unforeseen, indiscriminate, and accidental. Randomness by its very nature lacks a given pattern of predictability, standardization, or uniformity. It is thought that a random sequence of events, and circumstances has no order and does not follow an intelligible, comprehensible pattern or combination. Singular, respective or individual random events are determined to be unpredictable. Is there or can there be an analogous kinship between the predetermined and that of the unplanned existence of randomness?
For is there greater significances in the unseen or the barely acknowledged, than that, that is revealed and disclosed. Is there a scale of distinction between what is thought as ecumenical and that, that is minimally observed.
Does the process of decomposing vegetation in the terra incognita occupy more value than witnessing the marvels of human accomplishment?
Does the lethargic metamorphic transition from stone to sand hold greater vital significance than the onset of world conflict?
Can we acknowledge what is defined as accidental is in actuality quite deliberate. Is nothing incidental or is it only perceived as such to designate, construe, or compartmentalize the reality between the sustained or that of the immediate.
One must also realize there is no actual concrete difference between the tangible and the unsubstantial . We assume that tangibility only prevails in the material, and that it occupies space, structurally or other wise. Are not thoughts, dreams, interpretations and perceptions also tangible. and discernible.
Tangibility, and distinguishability can be singular and not necessarily plural entities. For is not genuine truth tangible? For truth is the existence of actuality, and tangibility is within the realm of definiteness, objectiveness, and embodiment.
Yet is not truth unquestionably, and legitimately subjective. Reflection and thought are not material entities within the Bailiwick of tradition. , for they are not clearly defined or conventionally assumed.
Tangibility is not vague or elusive and is fashioned as being palpable by nature. Truth too is in the realm of factualness, yet truth may not be true or sincere from an objective view point or frame of reference, given that it is actually in reality concretely subjective in nature.