The following is in response to Howard Mark’s commentary, Getting Lucky, which was published on January 16:
Dear Editor,
Marks’ arguments are self defeating. The main flaw is that he does not understand that he is talking about the "odds" and not "cause and effect." The bookies in Vegas make odds. If a betting person hits a 200-1 long shot, we say he is "lucky." But that was strictly because he beat the odds. It has nothing to do with the fact the horse ran the race of his life and won it, which would be cause (ran the race of his life) and effect (won the race) – provided, of course, the horse was not on steroids.
Our world operates through "cause and effect." Marks would argue that a "chance meeting" in an airport or a 'heads or tail' coin toss is a matter of luck. But if you could put either case in a vacuum, and exactly recreate the decisive elements that led to the outcome (shower time, traffic, etc. for the chance meeting and velocity, resistance, wind speed etc. for the coin toss) the outcomes would be the same every time, i.e. the law of "cause and effect."
Nothing occurs by chance or by luck!
More reading on this can be found in the works of Dr R.C. Sproul and Dr. Norman Geisler.
Best wishes,
John DeSantis
