symmetry
        : see @ text.notes.brec
        ∵ a larger symmetry is present that, ceteris paribus, speaks in favour of the design explanantia
            ∵ the [revealed] [triply] coincident end|object entails in practice
              what the design explanantia hypothesize in theory
                : re `the.+(end.object)` see `^*- all relate.+to the same ${1}$` @ text.notes.brec
                ∵ it entails as a means (future) safehold design
            ∵ the [revealed] presence of this larger symmetry beautifies the design explanantia
                ∵ the design explanantia enable this larger symmetry
                    ∵ it depends on them, they themselves (or one itself)
                      inhering in (figuring as [a] [necessary] part of) it
                ∵ symmetry has beauty
            ∵ ceteris paribus, beauty speaks in favour of an explanans
            ?!! what sort/degree of favour survives a condition so big?
                - symmetry typically figures as a virtue of theory for reasons more substantial
                  than its beauty, reasons that speak out boldly, with no condition to chaperone them
            !! redundant, a weakened echo of the strong support already given by the revealed coherence
        ∵ this larger symmetry implies that, if what the explanans of mundane design hypothesizes
          is possible, then also it is probable
            ∵ the symmetry implies that, if cosmocrafting is possible,
              then probably it has already been done in the past
            ∵ past cosmocrafting is what the explanans hypothesizes
            !! no sort/degree of favour survives an ‘if’ condition so big
            !! the implication is redundant
                - one already knows, without the help of symmetry, what here is claimed (spuriously) on
                  its behalf: that cosmocrafting being possible would speak in favour of the explanans