Can Philosophical Questions Loop Back to Their Origin?

[BeautifulLight]

Q: Why is the sky blue?
A: Because so and so.

Q: Well, why is so and so?
A: Because this and that.

Q: Well why is...

...

Philosophically, is it possible to end up with something like this?

Q: (last question)
A: Because the sky is blue

Can you make the full loop? Can you satisfy my last question using my first question?Also,"You" argue why the constants of nature are so finely tuned as if they give way to some sort of intelligent designer. I don't think anything of them. It just so happens they were tuned to allow for your existence, and therefore allowing you to ask the question "why are they so finely tuned?". If they were tuned any other way, then you wouldn't exist, and therefore you wouldn't have been able to address the question in the first place!Why should anyone's existence have anything to do with the universe existing? It would seem logical that a person's existence or life in general for that matter is irrelevant to whether or not the (materialistic) universe exists, but I'm having a tough time separating the two.

 

[DataGG]

Physicsforums does not allow philosophy.

 

[BeautifulLight]

Not even in the lounge? You're taking away everything of what it means to be human.


And didn't science develop out of philosophy? I don't know how you'll ever divorce the two...

 

[Ryan_m_b]

No not even in the lounge. For years we had a philosophy forum and it turned into a cesspool of nonsense. There's ways of discussing philosophy correctly but for the most part it was simply an excuse for people to speculate about anything and everything which is not the purpose of this site.