The Questions We Refuse to Face
Hide and Seek with the Truth
C. N. Vujanovic
WE ARE SCARED OF THE UNKNOWN. Questions, by their very definition, are unknown, and so we are scared of them.
Let me ask you a few questions:
1. Are we truly free in making our choices or are our actions predetermined? This may be through the interplay of genetics, environment, and possibly divine will…
2. Is morality a societal construct? Is it based on evolution or God’s will? Does it even exist?
3. Is there an objective purpose to our existence, or do we create our own meaning?
4. Is A.I. conscious?
These questions are unique in that they have been asked and thought about for millennia with seemingly no collective agreement. These questions contrast to the type of questions that can be answered with a microscope. These questions are those that transcend empirical investigation, scientific analysis, and the boundaries of what can be observed and measured.
See, there are broadly two types of questions. There is How? and there is Why?
How? is answered by scientific inquiry whereas, despite human effort, looking closer at a human brain does not tell us anything about our moral compass. Similarly, scientific questioning both does not and cannot tell us whether God exists because, if God does exist, God is by definition ‘supernatural’, or, in other words, outside the realm of scientific investigation.
In contrast, Why? seeks to understand the reasons behind things. For example, the ‘how’ might explain the biological mechanisms that contribute to feelings of calmness – the neurochemical synthesis and release of serotonin. However, the scientific ‘how’ does not fully account for the personal, subjective experience of these feelings. The subjective experience of any feeling, or ‘what it is like’ to experience something, cannot be accounted for (at this stage) by science because it is only accessible by introspection. Philosophers typically refer to it as ‘Qualia’.
There exists many theories to explain qualia but, as with all ‘why’ questions, there inevitably remains debate. If there is room for debate there will be debate. Some would go further and say that if there is debate there are two conclusions. One, these questions do not have answers. Secondly, and following from one, these questions are not worth asking.
For some, these questions are childish or even foolish.
I disagree.
I disagree with those who argue that these questions do not have answers. Consider, if there are answers to the questions of whether we are free, whether God exists or whether there are ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ actions, then these questions are the most important questions in the world. Yet, even if there are no answers, these questions are nonetheless important for innumerable reasons. Here are three:
1. The ‘why’ question itself underscores its significance. The meta-inquiry – a question about the value of questions – reflects a fundamental part of how we navigate our existence.
2. Engaging with these questions cultivates a profound sense of wonder in the universe. This wonder can, in turn, promote a meaningful life, that is – unless it leads you to stare nihilistic dread in the eyes.
3. It fosters critical thinking and reflective skills. By considering various answers to these questions it grows a nuanced perspective, a crucial skill in an increasingly polarised world.
In a world where the humanities are increasingly devalued in lieu of STEM it is important that they are both valued. Martin Cox, previously a Professor at Oxford, encapsulates this sentiment compellingly.
Paraphrasing his words: “If we get science wrong there are tragic consequences. Buildings collapse, planes crash, people die. But, if we get the humanities wrong, get literature, politics, or religion wrong then society crumbles. It is the difference between the tragic death of thousands and the death of society itself. Both are interdependent and essential.”
Nonetheless, because of the recent decline or degradation in the popularity of the humanities, I would argue that they need special attention. A revival of sorts.
Intrigued? If so, or even if you are just a tad curious, you are not alone. Perhaps consider it predetermined, a sort of destiny, that you have read this article, that you find it interesting, and that you want to find out more. Could it be that your purpose in life was to read these words and question further? Are you at this very moment procrastinating from doing School work by reading the Shore Weekly Record? Perhaps imagining that Chat GPT will do your homework later for you?
Hmm, I would imagine that is fine. A.I. is not alive or conscious… is it? Is it? If it was, would that mean you are complicit in unpaid labour…? (unless you have GPT-4, of course.)
Shore’s very own Agora Philosophy Club is currently delving into a three part series on A.I. If you want to have a clear conscience every time you use Chat GPT, come along on Thursday Lunchtime at 8-G-3, to stare in the eyes, the questions we refuse to face.
