  This paper has several objectives. First, it separates randomness from
lawlessness and shows why even genuine randomness does not imply lawlessness.
Second, it separates the question -why should I call a phenomenon random? (and
answers it in part one) from the patent question -What is a random sequence?
-for which the answer lies in Kolmogorov complexity (which is explained in part
two). While answering the first question the note argues why there should be
four motivating factors for calling a phenomenon random: ontic, epistemic,
pseudo and telescopic, the first two depicting genuine randomness and the last
two false. Third, ontic and epistemic randomness have been distinguished from
ontic and epistemic probability. Fourth, it encourages students to be applied
statisticians and advises against becoming armchair theorists but this is
interestingly achieved by a straight application of telescopic randomness.
Overall, it tells (the teacher) not to jump to probability without explaining
randomness properly first and similarly advises the students to read (and
understand) randomness minutely before taking on probability.
