in regards to mfb's statement about "how" statements:
i thought "why" was the question to shirk away from. i think differentiating "how" from "is" is somewhat semantic. "how" connotes an explanation, whereas "is" is book keeping; so i may venture to say that "how" is epistemological whereas "is" is ontological. but i suppose one may ask "how" ad infinitum just as one can with "why", and there seems to lie the rub.