Narkissos,
And what I metaphorically called "will" may just be the indescribable "inner side" of what must be described as "random" from the outside.
Actually AlmostAtheist made a good point here:
The random aspect of it is that there was no intent on the part of the sun to send it for the purpose of causing the mutation. It was just in the right place at the right time. In that sense, it's random.
True randomness only exists in mathematics. Full randomness means maximum entropy where nothing is predictable. Usually the probability theory when applied to the real world relies heavily on the concept of "conditional probability", which is the probability of the event X happening knowing that the event Y has happened. Randomness is thus only one of the factors involved. But you're right - there are some philosophical problems with it which I think ultimately boil down to having to choose between mechanistic determinism or some mystical force of randomness.
Maybe our language is to blame again? In every (meta)physics I know we use at least two fundamental constructs: metaphors (we've already discussed them) and modality (necessity, obligation, probability). I'd say they can be equally confusing.
Back to the topic...
I understand the mechanistic evolutionary theory of small genetic steps leading to big changes. What I don't get yet is when I see a relatively simple organism which uses stunnigly elaborate survival techniques which must have required thousands of small precise changes. Of course the concept of divine creational intervention obscures more than it explains in such cases. But it seems like something very important is missing from the mechanistic approaches. An external controlling factor? Yeah, I'm talking metaphysics again...
Pole