(December 20, 2011 at 5:30 am)Perhaps Wrote: I have a hypothesis which I would like to test. If any statement is made and the question of 'why?' is asked in reference to that statement there will be finite regress of statements until eventually an assumption is made.
We've all heard the illustration of a child asking the question 'why?' when their parents say something and the parent replies only to be asked 'why?' again until the parent goes insane. For a humorous example of this occurring here is a video (fast forward to 6:25): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u2ZsoYWwJA
Simply stated, is there any statement which can be made with no fundamental assumption being made? In other words, is there a statement that can withstand the question 'why?'?
A rather simplistic view, isn't it? There are other options available.
1. The reasoning could lead back to the original argument - "Why do you eat good food?" "Because it helps me live" "Why do you want to live?" "So that I can eat good food". Though this would be the fallacy of circular reasoning.
2. The burden could be shifted to another person. "Because my mom said so". "Why did she say so?" "Ask her".
3. The final answer could end up being an arbitrary wish: "Why do you want to continue living?" "I just want to. If you don't then don't".
That being said, if the discussion is truly rational, that is, everything is based on a valid reason, then the final "assumption", would be a part of a set of axioms that forms the basis of reason and logic itself. These axioms cannot be called assumptions because no meaningful statement or argument can be made that don't assume the validity of these axioms. These don't have an answer to the "why" because the very concept of "why" depends on them.
