RE: Evidence
September 9, 2013 at 7:00 pm
(This post was last modified: September 9, 2013 at 7:03 pm by Max_Kolbe.)
(September 9, 2013 at 3:41 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:(September 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm)Max_Kolbe Wrote: What is it about our evolution as humans (I don't have a problem with the theory of evolution) that we can even ask the question "why."
Is there a difference between "why do the stars move that way" and "how do the stars move that way." Aren't scientists moved to investigate by asking why, not just how?
No complaint. Only questions.
I think in certain cases, 'how?' answers also answer 'why?' questions. The stars move the way they do because of gravity.
Yes, I think that is what I was trying to get at. Scientists who ask how are probably also asking why, too. It seems to be part of being human to ask why.
(September 9, 2013 at 12:36 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote:(September 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm)Max_Kolbe Wrote: What is it about our evolution as humans (I don't have a problem with the theory of evolution) that we can even ask the question "why."
I think the answer offered by evolutionary psychologists seems apt. It essentially boils down to our evolutionary ingrained disposition towards associating agency behind things, which at times is a false positive, but has no negative impact with regards to reproduction. The usual analogy is that of a pre-human species who sees/hears the grass rustle. If they think it's a tiger in the grass and run away even though it was just the grass, they've had a false positive.
Quote:Is there a difference between "why do the stars move that way" and "how do the stars move that way." Aren't scientists moved to investigate by asking why, not just how?
There's a difference. Asking 'why' the stars move the way they do is fundamentally unanswerable, because there's no logically necessary reason why things behave the way they do at all (see David Hume's Adam and billiards analogy). That things behave as they do doesn't seem amenable to any necessity and can be infinitely be pushed back.
I don't think science (in a case like this) deals in 'whys'.
Is "why" fundamentally unanswerable? Might we someday come to a place in our knowledge about the world that we can answer why? Might we someday discover the "unmoved mover" whatever it might be or someday discover empirically that there isn't an unmoved mover.
