Why - When reason matters
Autor: Anderson Rodrigues | Publicado: 2017-06-22T09:18:00-07:00








Why should we ask why? 


Logically and simply speaking, “why” comes prior than “what”. At least, this used to be the logical way of thinking.



Basically, “what” is the thing itself. It is usually material and requires, even if there is a vast range of possibilities, a closed answer. 



For instance, think of the question “what will I do for a living?” Different answers can be provided. A Police officer, a dentist, an auditor, a soccer player, etc. Options are many; nevertheless, the answer is closed. However, intrinsically, no one is [or should not be] worried about “what” as much as with “why”. “Why will I do this or that for a living?” 



Why is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as the “For what reason or purpose.” It is the philosophical question that brings meaning to “what”. Without "why" there is no reason.



Why is also prior to whom. “To whom will I get married?” is logically different from “why will I get married?” A series of other questions should be answered to correctly answer this simple “why”.&nbsp;



What is marriage all about? What is the purpose of marriage? What is the meaning of it? Why, therefore, always raises the questions of meaning and purpose. By asking one simple “why”, our minds need to expand and connect the reality out there to the reality within us. We never change and reality never changes, but it becomes real and meaningful to our decisions and whatever we may be doing on this earth.



The question “what is this house made of?” suggests a simple answer of factual reality. It is made of wood. The question “why is this house made of wood?” enlarges the discussion and automatically demands philosophical issues. From necessity to simple taste, the “why” forces someone to give the reasons for “what” and make the world as it should be, meaningful and purposeful. 



Questions of “why am I here?” or, “what is life all about?” are questions on meaning. They are not silly questions. They are, indeed, the most basic and important questions one should answer.





Get rid of “why” and you get rid of life 

One of the greatest atheists in a University in England mentioned that “why” should never be asked in an atheistic framework, but only the question “how”, since there is no meaning whatsoever. 



This could sound as irrelevant if was not that fact that most of the world is living based on atheism and its ramifications. 



The fact of the matter is, when the world gave all authority to science to respond humanity’s questions, the “why” was entirely lost. The reason is simple; science alone cannot deal with philosophical matters. 



Given the fact that we have a mind and we obviously think, philosophy has to play its role. Stephen Hawking, one of the leaders in the scientific sphere, however, has an attitude to philosophy that denounces his role (and of the whole scientific community) in giving meaningful answers to humankind. He writes that, “Philosophy is dead. It has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly in physics. As a result, scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--> Given the fact that Hawking’s statement is itself a philosophical statement, a philosophical statement about science, he clearly contradicts itself. 



In fact, thinking comes always before acting. For this reason, “why” should always come prior to “what”. Before we can see and experientially test something, we need to be able to think about it. We synthesize material information through our eyes and decide about what we are seeing. Intangibility is indeed more important than what is tangible. Nevertheless, in a materialistic worldview, the way found to banish a possible intangible authority was by banishing “why”. When people are forced not to ask questions, life inevitably becomes meaningless and two things arise. Madness and violence. The consequences, history shows, has been dramatically bad.





When why is lost 

Without “why” there is no reason whatsoever. “Science” has provided the “what” explanation for human life, but has never touched into philosophical questions.&nbsp; Evolution, as taught in naturalistic or materialistic worldviews has no room for “why” questions. Random events. We just happened to exist. It is true that scientific theories have become a closed system where “why” is not encouraged.



There is, in fact, a confusion with terminologies to make up the whole thing, bringing confusion to people’s mind. The definition of evolution, for instance, as a fact instead of a theory, which is clearly wrong, and the definition of creation as purely religious, which is also wrong, have collaborated to compromise the “whys” people ought to ask. Truly, evolution has become a religion a long time ago, since the lack of evidence and the existent gaps need to be filled with a good dose of faith. On the other hand, Creation, or Intelligent Design, is the only explanation that does not go against any scientific laws and can be proved to be much more scientific than any other scientific theory. However, the biased view that comprehensively spread in the academic sphere does not allow authorities to recognize this fact. After all, facts themselves are no more valuable information. 



The “why” is, therefore, not taught at all. Even if there are no evidences nor facts to prove the “what” suggested by science, it has been forced to be believed as the absolute truth. Postmodernism sets the rule again, where something is considered to be true even without evidence. Everything is relative, they say, except for what they want to be absolute, such is the case of evolution and its ramifications. Without reason and logic, blind faith is the only option, not adopted by serious Christians, but by a science.&nbsp; “What modern secular scientists believe is far more incredible than any biblical miracle accepted by the simple Christian believer.”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]-->&nbsp; 



In the United States, the discussion between reason and supposed facts, between the why and the what went to the courts. The scenario was essentially the following:



&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;1925 - The Scopes Trial in Tennessee - Evolution was prohibited by law for being considered a threat to the beliefs of American people; the discussion between science and religion started to become hot.
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;1968 - The Epperson Supreme Court Ruling asserts that prohibition of evolution is a violation of the first Amendment.
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;1982 - The McLean Trial in Arkansas. A project where Creation should also be taught together with Evolution. The Court rejected the project and Evolution became, more than never, the official religion of the State.
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;1987 - Edwards Supreme Court Ruling in Louisiana. No place for Creation again. Naturalism is the official religion of the State.
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;1990 - The Webster Ruling in Illinois. A professor was prohibited from teaching creation and the Supreme Court agreed with such prohibition. There is no “why” left to students.
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;2000 - The LeVake ruling in Minnesota. A professor is forbidden to teach the problems of evolution. The School and the Court understood he was endorsing religious belief. The fact is, only the Naturalist religion should prevail.
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;2005 - The Dover Case in Pennsylvania. Creation was once again rejected and forbidden.



<!--[if !supportLists]-->













To put it simply, without an alternative view of the origin of the universe, such as Creation, there is no reason or meaning whatsoever. There is no “why” we could possibly ask. After all, “a Creator—or even an indirect reference, such as a reference to teleological purpose in nature—is ipso facto a nonscientific explanation”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]-->.


However, the consequences of a “non-why” generation are painfully depicted in history. “The Nazi movement and racism were scientifically justified on evolutionary biological grounds”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]-->. The dead of 100 million human beings in the twentieth century can be attributed to this “philosophical non-philosophical worldview”, which justifies every act in the name of humanity’s survival. “In light of the evidence, we are left with only two options: either no one created something out of nothing, or else someone created something out of nothing. Which view is more reasonable? […] The most reasonable view is God.”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]-->




When why lost its meaning in Christianity

The last hope for “why”, and consequently, for reason, meaning, and purpose to exist is in the hands of faithful Christians, who are to live their lives in a manner that enables them to teach through words and acts for this lost world to see.&nbsp; 


Before dealing with Christians, let me explain something. “Why” may have been forced to be dead, especially with “God’s dead” in the nineteenth century, according to the influential philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Reason or purpose literally died from that time on. However, one could ask me, “why do I think only Christians could bring meaning to this meaningless society? I know many atheists who live based on defined purposes and believe in a meaningful life.” Herein lies the problem. 


These atheists, who affirm to live with a certain “sense of purpose”, are not living according to their own belief. This sense of purpose is evidently within each and every human, for all of us cannot actively accept a meaningless life. However, in a naturalistic worldview, based on a random life, the pure result of matter+time+chance, there is any room for meaning or purpose. There is no ground for such argument whatsoever. There is no reason, in an atheistic framework, to believe in purpose or meaning. There is, indeed, no reason at all. As human beings, people can think about purpose; they can ask “whys”; they can be living a moral life; nevertheless, they may be claiming to believe in something (atheism) that denies a logical possibility for what they are in fact doing. In an atheistic framework, there is no "why" whatsoever. You may believe otherwise, but this is the fact for an atheist who truly lives according to what he or she believes.


Now, back to the Christians. Following a set of rules has become part of Christian’s communities all over the world. The “what” often prevails over the “why”. Let me give an illustration:


What: Meeting together with other Christians. Meetings will often take place and people will believe to be in compliance with their “obligation”. However, why are this taking place? Convenience? To eat food? To have fun? To “consume” a service by what is expected to receive? 


Why should Christian meet together? This question should be obviously answered prior to the meeting. Nevertheless, Christians have lost the capability to answer these questions for being influenced by secular views, which sneakily entered Christian minds. 


We can see the results. Churches growing in numbers, doing, doing and doing, but with no real transformation. Christianity should build civilization and transform society. We can see this throughout history. The United States of America, for instance, is the result of a good Christianity.




What really matters – the most important why 




I know that relevant changes by this time are a tremendous challenge. Given the secularization, the loss of religious influence and significance in the public arena, Christianity is hardly accepted as a way to rule the world. Not surprisingly, the world is getting worse day after day.


How could then, “why” be restored? By truly understanding and living it. 


Everything we do requires a motivation, a motive that brings us to action. I remember my first interview at a renowned audit firm, part of the selective group of the Big Four, in 2009. I was required to answer the question, “how to find motivation in the midst of a crisis.” The economic crisis of 2008 was still affecting the economy at that time. My answer was uncommon and shocked the partners who were conducting the interview. It was based on the following.

There is a biblical text that illustrates the most important “why” and “what” that drives us, consciously or not, to almost everything we do. The words are from the Apostle Paul. 


If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing (1 Corinthians 13:1-3)


The text is giving extraordinary examples. Having all science and knowledge. Having faith to move mountains. Giving everything to the poor and even dying for someone. Nothing has meaning if love does not exist. 


I cannot think of any other word that has lost its meaning more than the word love. The real motive that drives us has been distorted by a secularized philosophy. People are struggling with depression, cancer (Psychosomatic illness), suicide and other emotional malaises, and the question “why” is not being asked! When we lose the very sense of what is to be a human, we are left with nothing more than evil, suffering, violence, and madness. Is this the world we looking forward to living? Is this the progress promised by Marxism? Is this the advancement evolutionary science pointed out?


We are relational beings. We need relationship. It is not only a matter of preference. We need it. We came out of two, becoming three (father, mother, and son). Everything starts with more than one. Believe me; nothing like this could have come out of nothing. The way I have illustrated follow this sequence:




&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;We are relational beings. We can know it pragmatically, experientially, and emotionally.
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;For genuine relationships to exist, love needs to exist. One must decide to be with someone for a reason. This follows a whole chain of “what”. We study, we work, we buy, we do consciously or not everything to preserve relationships. Love is the core of life.
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;For love to exist, we need to be able to differentiate between good and evil. I have to choose what is good for someone; I am not obligated to do it.
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;For good and evil to be defined, law must exist. Without a standpoint of reference, we cannot know what is good and evil.
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;For law to exist, someone righteous and in the position to set the rules shall exist.

<!--[if !supportLists]-->









These logical and consistent facts, which are observable, experientially lived, emotionally perceived and clearly seen in the history of humankind brings the great “why” we all need to answer to the scenario.


We are here to love and because of love. We love relationships. We want to love and be loved. Parents, spouses, friends, sons and daughters. The greatest “why” as a coherent and consistent answer; love. 


If there is no God, there is no law. If there is no law, there is no knowledge of good nor evil. If there is no knowledge of good nor evil, there is no possibility for love to exist. If there is no love, there is no genuine relationship. What is left? Answer me; what is left? 


“‘Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?’ Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:36-40).


Keep asking why, and you will keep living in this dark world as an example to others. God is the only one who can restore meaning, reason, and purpose for this world. Love is seen everywhere, but it has shown its fullness in the Cross of Christ. “There is no greater love than to lay down one's life for one's friends” (John 15:13). He loves us. God is love, He is the only answer to a lost humanity.


<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->

<!--[endif]-->




<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--> Excerpt from Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow’s The Grand Design in The Times Eureka, Issue12 (September 2010), 18.



<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]--> Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek. I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist. (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2004), 66.



<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]--> L. Ross Bush. The Advancement: Keeping Faith in the Evolutionary Age. (Nashville: B &amp; H Academic, 2003), 19. 



<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]--> Ibid, 30.



<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]--> Geisler and Turek. I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist, 94.