Most of us become interested in theoretical physics, as we seek to understand the workings of the world around us. At the heart of theoretical physics are the big questions such as "what is time?", "what 'caused' the universe", "why these laws of physics? Why this equation?" "Is our universe anthropic?". Like most people, i find these questions interesting, worrying and vexing all at once. The more i read the more i have come to see these questions as unanswerable, almost dare i say it pointless. I like many others passed through a stage believing in the ability of physics to form a "theory of everything", but i have matured, and now see this goal as a philosophical, or even physical impossibility. My readings included much of the field of philosophy of science, by authors such as Putnam, Popper and Quine, as well as considering the mathematical search for rigor by the likes of Cantor, Godel and Brouwer. Mathematics as the "tool" of theoretical physics, should be used to guide physical work, and problems in mathematics inevitably lead to issues within our theoretical models of physics. The crisis within set theory, searching for a link between predicate calculus and our mathematical axioms pales in comparison with the problems which occur when we attempt to explain our reality from an objective basis. Why something rather than nothing? We will never answer this question. By its very definition it is unanswerable. Our models can be made more comprehensive, but we will never have a final "why" answer, without invoking a philosophical set of axioms. If we did the unthinkable, and proved some form of multiverse string theory, we would just have shifted the question back to "what made the multiverse or geometric construction we observe". While it is fun to ask and try to answer these questions, this is not what physics is about. Physics describes and to a certain level explains our world, but at a certain stage (which i believe we passed with the quatum revolution) we are relying upon mathematical facets to work out theories and without said envoking neo platonic mathematical views we must accept that our theories of physics, are maps, imperfect at that, which describe reality but do not explain it. I continue to see students (I myself am still only an undergrad) inspired by the writings of hawking et al. strive to enter into the field of cosmology in the hopes of explaining our reality. As i have said, i myself once went through this stage. It is not a pointless quest, but it cannot be denied that our model, whatever it will be, will never be logically objective, the "theory of everything" is a misleading term, creating the effect of a religious doctrinated science. Our method of science is to question, to always question, and the quest for a complete theory of everything, is counterpoint to this. It will be a sad day for physics, for science, when we must accept a doctrine without question, and for this reason we will continue to perfect our model, thus highlighting the useless belief in a "theory of everything". The quest of physics is to describe nature, not explain it. We humans are organisms on the mantle of an insignificant speck of an insignificant galaxy. Some people find that depressing, i find it liberating. Do we see ourselves as gods? why should reality work the way we see? Without a creator god (which i reject due to logical contradiction within formalism) the questions at the heart of our search will never be explainable. Does this mean we should stop trying? Of course not. Science gives us control over our environment, and this will only continue to be so. We should even continue to ask these "pointless" questions, but we should acknowledge their own counterthesis. Science is not perfect, because we ourselves are not. That said, we should not view it in a postmodern view akin to literature. Science is the world according to us, to our evolved ability and function, we cannot fully control our view of the world as we can in literature, and in this sense science should remain rigorous and respected. There is no other process mor important or more beautiful but it comes at a price, and that price is certainty.