This seems like a practical outlook. “Why” isn’t really a philosophically enlightened question, it reeks of unenlightened meaning making and reification. It is a social question. Why did Peter do this? “Why” is an ambigouous form of “what”. “Why did Peter do this” really means, “What were the reasons behind Peter doing this?” Why is a weak version of what. It finds satisfaction in unclear answers.
If we ask “Why are we here” the answer “God made it that way” gives the “why” people satisfaction. So we must ask “For what reason did God put us here, what made God, and what can we do about it?”
Asking “Why is God here” doesn’t take us any further, it is a dead end question.
Really, we must ask, is what. What is our consciousness, what happens in the afterlife, and what we should do it about it. This is practical, sane and rational Enlightened Horse Philosophy.
So horses don’t make very good philosophers ~ they are only interested in factual concerns, which is probably good if you are an animal [to evade predators etc]. Does this make philosophies based upon ‘why’ flaccid or lesser in some way? A luxury of human existence being beyond the rudimentary reality of other animals?
I could argue that where philosophy differs from science [also philosophy], is in the asking ‘why’.
This is also the main point behind invention, new ideas generally, and WHY humans are more advanced than animals!
humanities most salient feature is possibly in the ‘why’.
“What causes humans to be advanced” is a better formula of “Why are humans advanced”?
Why is a simplification of of what.
Why did God make the universe? Because he wanted us to have free will. But why does he want us to have free will? Because freedom and free will is good.
What is free will? Can’t be defined. Who cares what it is, it just exists. Who knows what free will even is, as long as they know why free will must exist.
The facts are the only important things.
Why are humans advanced? Bigger brains.
But what in their brains causes them to be advanced?
More informative. Why is like the younger brother of What.
All of your questions, such as “why” flaccid, etc. could be reformulated as what. What is behind the flaccid state? What can do anything Why can, it is like the upgraded Nvidia Pro card, Why is its younger half brother the poorly formulated onboard crappy intel videocard, struggling to render ideas in high resolution.
~ they are only interested in factual concerns, which is probably good if you are an animal [to evade predators etc]. Does this make philosophies based upon ‘why’ flaccid or lesser in some way? A luxury of human existence being beyond the rudimentary reality of other animals?