I am often emailed essays and books by readers who are interested in educating me. Every now and again, one of these offers grabs my attention before hitting delete. Recently, Robert L. Fry (a Johns Hopkins physicist-engineer) emailed me a paper from 92 years ago that he thought I might like, considering how much I promote the idea of doubt. He was correct.Felix S. Cohen was a lawyer who specialized in Native American rights. He wrote What Is A Question? in 1929 for The Monist, a revered philosophy journal. My brain was energized by Cohen's main point in quirky prose. He asserts that philosophers obsess about the nature of propositions and assertions, but almost ignore questions.Cohen says that questions are more than a psychological provocation. They are a way to get to the end of the answers. Questions are valuable as an individual; questions in philosophy are more important than answers.Cohen says that those who have solved the world's problems more often than those who have solved them. Here are some more thoughts that Cohen's essay provoked.QUESTIONS, EQUATIONS, AND SENTENCESCohen suggests that propositions often contain implicit questions. Cohen suggests that questions are often implicit in propositions. For example, x = 5 + 3 is equivalent to asking: What is the sum three and five? I would go so far as to say that all human discourse is based on questions. Humans are curious creatures like many other organisms. Language is our primary means of exchanging information. This could be described as the ability to answer explicit or implicit questions. This holds true for all communication forms, from low-level conversation about weather, sports and new Netflix shows to more complex philosophy, science, and mathematics.I've struggled to understand the mathematics behind quantum mechanics. Understanding a differential equation means that I know the implicit question it answers. It has a propulsive effect, as if the numbers or notations are pointing forward towards a possible solution. Because I don't understand differential equations very well, the symbols sit on the page inert. I don't know what questions are animating the equations or the answers they point to.MULTIPLE-CHOICEQUESTIONSCohen refers to questions that give one answer as determinate, while questions with multiple answers are called indeterminate. Cohen cites the example of the ancient philosophical conundrum "What is the good?".Another example of an indeterminate problem is the mind-body issue. The mind-body problem, in a technical sense, asks how matter creates a mind. But it also asks more general questions such as "Who are we?" Mind-body theorists are looking for a single, definitive, universal answer to this question. This can be written in any language, including neuroscience, physics and computer science. Because science and culture continue to invent new answers and each person must determine who they are in their own way, there can't be one final answer. Each person may find a solution to the mind-body puzzle in a different way over the course of their lives.PHILOSOPHY AS Q-BEGGINGMy students use the term "beg the question" as a synonym for asking the question. Your conclusion is already foregone. One example is integrated information theory. It attempts to explain consciousness using a concept called information that presupposes conscious. This begs the question. Cheating.Cohen uses the phrase "Beginning the question" but he does not use it. Cohen warns against asking questions that assume indeterminate answers are certain. I'd go even further. Philosophy is the study of questions without answers. Philosophy as a whole is a big exercise in question-begging, in the sense that it assumes its questions are answered.Cohen seems to be making the same point in this twisty passage. We will never be able to bridge the chasms between a human soul and primitive marks and sounds, but if we want to have a rational intercourse between men and women, we must approach the ideal unambiguous speech. To do this, we need to remember that the ideal transcends the language that pursues them.QUANTUM MECHANICS & TWENTY QUESTIONSScience asks questions, and unlike philosophy, can be answered by observation, experiment, reasoning, and mathematical reasoning. Science has already provided many answers to many questions, including the theory and evolution, the genetic code as well as quantum mechanics, general relativity, general relativity, and the big bang theory. In a recent column I noted that scientists believe that science's answers will eventually lead to a complete and satisfying description of nature that answers all our questions.Others scientists are against the idea that there is a final description for reality. They believe that new questions always arise from answers. Popular metaphors suggest that the shore of ignorance grows as our knowledge increases. Some scientists believe science can survive the end of the universe and the solar system. Although these arguments for science endlessness used to seem sentimental and naive, they have become more appealing.Quantum mechanics is also a challenge to the idea of objective, final knowledge. It suggests that the answers we get are dependent on the questions we ask. John Wheeler, a physicist, compared science with the surprise version Twenty Questions. A group of people selects an animal, person, place, or thing in the normal version of the game. It is up to me to guess by asking the members of the group questions with a yes/no answer. Is it able to move? Is it well-known? Is it a female?The surprise version of this game is where the group does not agree on an answer beforehand. Each person chooses a person/place/animal/thing only after I ask my yes-or-no question. Each person thinks about something in their own way and then answers my questions. However, I have the restriction that each answer must match previous ones. In this game as in quantum mechanics, we can only probe the truth with specific questions.ENLIGHTENMENT AS ACCEPTANCE TO THE MYSTERYWilliam James, in The Varieties of Religious Experience quotes philosopher Xenos describing an epiphany induced from ether. Clark was convinced by this experience that philosophy is like a dog hunting its own tail and that the true end of philosophy comes when we stop intellectual questioning.Similar to Buddha and other wise men, spiritual wisdom or enlightenment is found in the total acceptance of all moments of existence. You stop asking questions once you have reached this state. Not because you know all the answers, but because questions and answers no longer matter. You're just chillin. You're just chillin.If that is what enlightenment means, then I don't want to be enlightened. Stephen Batchelor, a Buddhist teacher, views enlightenment as a serene acceptance rather than as exhilarating, terrifying awe in the face of all the mystery.Unenlightened people often worry about the future and are uninformed. We worry about the future. Our personal fate, as well as the fate of the country and the entire world, is a major concern. Are climate change and the loss of value to my beachside bungalow going to be a factor? Should I end my relationship with my girlfriend if she doesn't get vaccinated? How will Joe Biden's win affect my stock portfolio?Many of us don't see the "simple mystery" of the universe, as Batchelor puts it. I call this the weirdness. Perhaps we become so wrapped up in our own problems that we lose sight of the world's weirdness.However, unless there is something catastrophic happening to humanity, there will always exist a few misfitsartists scientists philosophers mystics who see the strangeness and unanswered question at the core of things and try to make the rest of us see it. It doesn't have to be expressed in a specific way. You could express it as a grunt or astonishment such as Hunh, Wha?, or simply?THE APPROPRIATENESS of UPTALKMy girlfriend Emily was amused when I explained What Is a Question! to her. She said that young women are frequently mocked for using uptalk, which is inflecting their speech in such a way that it sounds like they are asking questions. Emily suggests that uptalk, given the uncertain nature of all knowledge is more appropriate than forceful, confident declarations. Perhaps philosophers, scientists, and mathematicians should use uptalk when pontificating. Maybe science writers should also speak in uptalk?After reading What Is A Question? several times and trying to write this column, all my thoughts turn into uptalk. I need a break so I go outside my apartment and walk into the Hudson River park. I take in the sky, trees, ferry terminal, clock tower, sailboats and barges, geese, seagulls, dogs, fishermen, joggers, cyclists, and all around me, there are questions.This article is an opinion/analysis article. Scientific American does not necessarily endorse the views expressed in it.Additional Reading:In my most recent books, Pay Attention: Death, Sex, Science, Science, and Mind-Body Problems: Science Subjectivity and Who We Really are, I ask many questions.
