triplew00t

FYI, I have tried the "I dont know" response on him. He still asks why until I say "thats just the way the universe is" or "why not?" or some derivitive thereof.

Nero

Quantum Ninja

I'll agree that science is more about the "How" than the "Why", but you can form an infinite regress out of the question "How?", too.

There is either a dead-end in what we can know about how the universe works or there isn't (law of non-contradiction). If there isn't a dead end, then we can ask "How" infinitely many times and can never hope to understand everything. If there is a dead-end, then we've reached a point where we cannot find an answer to "How does this work?" Again, we cannot understand everything about how the universe works.

Personally, I like the infinite regress option better because it guarantees that the pursuit of science will never end. And suppose that it is true that there is a dead-end in knowledge; how would we know we've reached it? I propose that we cannot. There is always hope that there is an answer out there, but it has not yet been found.

sophie

Quantum Ninja,

Think for a moment some question was asked, which led through infinite regress to "how does one (1) (the number 1) work", or "why is there a 1", do you not think the question ends there with answers to one?

Quantum Ninja

Well, suppose we are just dealing with mathematics for a minute, and the initial question pertained to advanced calculus. Someone continously asks, "Why?" or "How?", leading us through explanations of calculus, algebra, arithmetic, and counting.

Mathematics is really just a bunch of layered concepts that stack on top of one another, with counting and the concept of quantity being the foundation. Within the realm of mathematics, you can't really explain why numbers exist or how they work. These are just initial concepts, definitions, you must accept. I don't believe there is a mathematical answer to "Why do numbers exist?" In the realm of math, I think all questions end at definitions.

Once you arrive at a definition, the only question you can ask is, "Why is so-so defined this way." The only is answer is, "That's just the way it's defined."

"Why do squares have four equally lengthed sides that are orthogonal to one another?"
"Because that's the definition of a square."
"Why is that the definition of a square?"
"Because that's how a square is defined..."

The etymology of the word "definition" pretty much means a dead-end.

How do you know the universe doesn't have base-level definitions that cannot be further explained?

sophie

Quantum Ninja :

Perhaps you are mixing up dead-end with final answer. When you use the word dead-end, it connotes to me being finally baffled.

Final answer seems to bring with it a need for a deep perceptive understanding, a search within the self to explain the relationship between the subjective self having evolved alongside the big bold universe. This final answer which lies at the bottom of knowledge should not be considered a dead-end.

Children are not expected to have final answers at early ages neither should a parent strive to provide final answers. They only shake their head and say yes, I understand, meanwhile they understand squat, but leave believing their parents are stupid, because it is their parents who have led them to the dead-end.

When a kid sees a dead-end admist all the colorful wonders of the world, the naturally selective processes of the child assigns stupidity to the bearer of the dead-ends.

love

Sophie

Quantum Ninja

Sophie,

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by a "final answer." How is it different than a dead in knowledge?

A final answer is an answer beyond which you cannot question further, like a definition. In response to a final answer, you can still ask, "Why" or "How", and there would be no answer. That sounds like a dead-end to me.


All answers can be questioned. Not all questions can be answered. As long as an answer is provided, even a "final answer", you can still ask, "Why" or "How", but you're not guaranteed another answer.

sophie

Quantum Ninja,

well my good friend, it becomes absurd to further a final understanding using a how or a why. Therefore the long answer to this is infinite regression of hows and whys ends up not at a dead-end but on the platter of a fool.

This is "why" there is "the absurd" in philosophy. When you cross over there, I doubt if I will be around to answer.

Most ad infinitums I have heard about are grounded in reality - what else?

Quantum Ninja

But how do you know when you've reached a "final answer?" When do you know it becomes absurd to question any further? Will scientists one day just say, "Oops. That's it, fellas. Looks like we've reach the final answer. Oh well, let's pack-up and go home?" There's always the possibility that a "final answer" can be further explained by a smaller layer of reality that you did not consider or were unaware of.

sophie

Quantum Ninja : There's always the possibility that a "final answer" can be further explained by a smaller layer of reality that you did not consider or were unaware of.

I will be the first to agree, I will be the first to acknowledge this and perhaps I will be the first to look deeper, and this is because I am searching for the final answer.

Quantum Ninja : Will scientists one day just say, "Oops. That's it, fellas. Looks like we've reach the final answer. Oh well, let's pack-up and go home?"

Yes they will, when the universe is re-created in human image, or re-creatable in human image, they will all pack up and go home to play GOD, knowing they had the final answer. But if re-creation failed, then my boys, crawl under the beds and hide, because every jackass will be after your hides.

yguy

I am reminded of the story of a man who beat his fists against on of the columns of the Parthenon while uttering the desparing cry, "I'm walled in! Walled in!"

I think we are peeling the onion thinking we are outside of it, when we are actually inside it, and it is infinitely large. Thus, the search for the "ultimate particle" of which everthing is made, for instance, is a bit like the search for the smallest number, or the biggest.