I love the questions that children ask. They are raw, unfiltered, pure. Their questions give us insight into how their inquisitive little minds absorb the world around them. They remind me of the wonders of my own childhood musings.
Their questions also make me challenge my own perspective. This post is based around an anecdote of one such instance.
My young children are in their questioneering prime. Deeply absorbed in their own curiosity. They posses an insatiable desire to understand every phenomenon they encounter.
I always endeavor to answer their questions, or to help them find the answer out for themselves. Recently, however, I’ve been subjected to a line of questioning that has had me stumped. It goes something like this:
“why is {insert object or phenomena here} a thing? For example:
- Why are the planets a thing?
- Why are people a thing?
- Why is dying a thing?
These are deep questions. I just can’t do justice to them while trying desperately to get them to sleep. It’s usually at the end of a long day. It might also be at the end of a pint or three of ‘parenting juice’.
Bedsides the time of day, the secondary challenge is that I don’t agree with the premise of these questions. They grapple with the “why?” of the universe and the natural world which implies there is meaning to all of this nonsense.
Perhaps “how” would help us with these questions? The fields of astronomy and physics have given us the big bang theory to explain how the planets came to be. The study of cell biology and genetics has revealed how people evolved. And the field of medicine and health science helps us to understand mortality.
But I’m just not convinced that the “how” is what my child is wanting to discover.
So I owe it to all of my children, and my over active mind, to delve into this dilemma.
Asking “why” something exists is a central question of philosophy – and a complex one too! different schools of thought have distinct perspectives on the matter.
Why the problem with ‘why’?
The proposition that I have put forward here is a widely discussed point. It suggests that the question “why” implies innate meaning. Philosophers and scientists often differentiate between two types of “why” questions. Some seek a cause. Others aim to find a reason or purpose.
The Scientific Perspective (Cause)
Science primarily seeks to answer “how” questions, not “why” questions in the sense of purpose. As I mentioned earlier, a scientist can explain how the universe came into being (e.g., the Big Bang theory), but cannot answer why it exists.
From this scientific viewpoint, asking for a purpose for the universe is a category error. It’s applying the concept of purpose to something that may not have such a purpose. Purpose is only relevant to conscious, intentional beings.
Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll, for example, argues that the universe “just is.” He believes we should not expect an external reason for its existence. But good luck getting a four year old to accept that as an answer! In fact, I tried that, but out of desperation rather than wisdom.
Right, so I think we need to put the scientific perspective to bed (along with the kids) and look elsewhere.
Existentialist and Absurdist Perspectives (Reason)
Thinkers like Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre explored the “problem of why” from the perspective of human existence. They argue that the universe has no inherent meaning or purpose. The human condition, on the other hand, is to constantly search for meaning in a world that offers none. This is the absurd.
Excellent. I am justified in my original position. I don’t agree with the premise of the question. My child is absurd and should just go to sleep!
Asking “why” life exists is futile because there is no preexisting reason. Thinkers such as Camus and Sartre argue that the meaning of life is not to be discovered. It is something to be created by individuals through their choices and actions.
Okay, so now we’re getting somewhere. But why didn’t that occur to me sooner, or during the heat of the questioning? Has my social conditioning changed my perspective? Has my “education” shifted my focus? Have I moved from the awe and wonder of childhood to the scientific observation of adulthood?
I hope not! So let’s dive deeper into the meaning of life.
Metaphysical and Theological Perspectives (Reason)
Traditionally, “why?” questions about existence have been the domain of metaphysics. This is way beyond what my poor little brain can comprehend. These questions are also in the domain of theology.
Many philosophers and religious thinkers argue that the universe does have a reason for its existence. Such reason is often tied to a divine creator or an ultimate reality. This perspective posits that the “why?” question is not only meaningful but essential, as its answer reveals the fundamental nature of reality. For example, Aristotle’s concept of an “Uncaused Cause” or “Unmoved Mover” aimed to provide a metaphysical reason for existence. It served as a logical conclusion or starting point to the chain of causation.
But how on god’s green earth am I going to help my child work through that? Maybe that’s a good reason to lean on the stories passed on through myth, legend and religious texts. “God did it, the end. Now go to sleep”.
No, I need to get find a better way to help my kids answer these questions.
Why “Why?” helps us to find meaning
Some philosophers, particularly those in the tradition of logical positivism, have argued that the question “why is there something rather than nothing?” is a meaningless question.
As we discussed through the Scientific Perspective, they contend that a question is only meaningful if it can be verified through empirical observation. It must also have logical proof. There is no conceivable observation that could answer the “why” of existence. Therefore, the question is considered a linguistic or philosophical error. Which, again, is the lens through which I had been studying my child’s questions. This has not helped me, nor my child.
Thankfully, there are others who disagree. Some argue that even if the question is unanswerable, it is far from meaningless. The very act of asking it can lead to profound insights about the limits of human reason and the nature of our place in the universe.
So what?
Psychologist Sanford Drob suggests that the question “why?” signifies a “quest for value” to explain existence. I love this perspective. It’s a great thought to round out what I have learned through writing this post:
You don’t have to answer your child’s questions logically or literally. Explore their questions further and see what it can teach you both. Answer their questions with other questions.
Children are probably the world’s purest philosophers if you let them dream.
And…
As adults, our social conditioning has rendered us much less smart than we like to think we are.
Let your children draw you back into the blank slate of an open mind.
To whoever may stumble across these words, I thank you, for granting my thoughts release.
With gratitude,
Harmen Wordsmith.
Harmen Wordsmith 
Leave a comment