Many people do both.
But “should” for what purpose?
Should one question whether he or others should do this or that?
The word should implies that I could do something or think in a certain way if I just wanted to. Such implication does not take into consideration my experiential condition to which the claim is made. The word seems to smack of some parental authority that claims it knows better than I about how I should respond to anything. Should is also an atavistic response to a given situation., e.g., I should have thought or have done something other than I did or thought. It’s a problematic word, suggesting advice not asked for.
Why question the questioning? In my experience and what I have seen of history written, those that are in power that refuse to accept being questioned and tell people just to trust them often are not to be trusted. They pretend to be beyond reproach, that the very questioning is an insult against them. Why not question the way the world is? It wasn’t created that way, certainly. It was a blank slate once, if I’m not mistaken.
The world was never a tabula rasa. There was always, since the beginning of life, some organism to perceive it.
Why do you ask?
But then, nor are those who don’t. Trust is not so easily found.
You ARE mistaken.
Nothing throughout the entire infinite universe throughout infinite time has ever been a “blank slate”. Questioning serves three purposes:
1) to tell of what currently is [present]
2) to tell of how it got that way [past]
3) to reveal a means to avoid the undesired and/or progress to the desired. [future]
Questioning, appropriately, reveals God and all creation.
Because this is a philosophy forum and questioning things is what people who are interested in philosiphy do.
Because someone questioned it and I wanted an answer as to why they were questioning it.
Your faulty correction based on your understanding of English aside (both are correct), You would be correct and I wouldn’t say any differently. Anybody could be making a ploy for any reason and even if no ploy is involved, might think themselves to be more able than they actually are or more knowledgeable. You might wind up trusting them and having it all fall apart; but then again, even if they are knowledgeable and able doesn’t mean that things won’t still fall apart. Trust is very easily found if you actually look for it. And no, I won’t explain how to look for it. That would be stupid.
Really? Explain.
How do you know that nothing has ever been a blank slate? Similarly, you could ask me how I do know and I could tell you because I’ve seen it, I’ve known of its existence.
How do you know that through questioning, what you question will tell the truth? What makes you think that if you were told of the past that it would be true and not just what you would accept to be true?
Same with how it got that way, how would you know for sure that what you learned was true?
And, no matter what you do in life, you can not avoid the undesired and even if you do things perfectly right does not mean you will progress to the desired.
Really? Just questioning? Like, you don’t have to do anything else other than that? And, there’s an appropriate way of questioning as opposed to an inappropriate way? You must teach me this appropriate way.
Apparently, no organism other than humans questions anything. This is evidence that questioning comes from memes, which are all too human. For any other animal to question its existence would amount to a delay in life situations where immediate actions are required or in necessary rest or inactivity. For humans, questioning implies that there are alternative ways of seeing or being. It is the option other animals do not have as to how to conduct our lives and thoughts.
Everything in life is memetics and legacies.
No. Everything in thought is memetics and legacies. Life goes on regardless of what we think of it.
Everything in thought is brought out, in one way or another, into physical life. Everything we pass on in one form or another is memetic legacy.
Memes are products of minds, not of the natural world. To assume otherwise, one must conclude that both reality and the sense of reality are objective entities. All that we claim to be objective amounts to consensus of subjective agreements.
Ah, but what nature causes us to think, thinking is done in the mind, which produces memes, which affect the world around us, both natural and what we created, thus causing nature to change and adapt to include the memes that we bring forth from the mind and from thoughts that are generated by the natural world around us, whether firmly tied to what nature originally was or far distanced from it.
I am not saying that the subjective mind has no influence over the natural world. I’m simply saying that my take on the natural world is subjective/memetic or on takes of others whom I may agree with, who sense the natural world. I agree that there is something beyond the senses to which we react. That we can manipulate matter shows some accuracy in what the senses reveal to us about the natural world. Yet my knowing this is still subjective/memetic. To question the way the world has been created, or came to be as it is, one must assume to have superior scientific knowledge, philosophical or religious certainty.
True.
There is no such animal as metaphysical certainty; therefore, we learn by questioning or by settling for the opinions of supposed authorities.
genetics/environment ↔ neurons ↔ consciousness/mind ↔ memes. Note that this progression works forward and backward. Memes affect minds; minds affect bodies, etc.
We only learn by questioning when doubt exists. People assume that by questioning they’ll get truthful answers. We learn more by doing and experiencing.
Doing and experiencing are default positions.
“Experience is a good teacher, and a fool will learn from none other.”-- Benjamin Franklin
Some times it’s good to go back to the basics. When you trust others to lead you, you pay more attention to them than you do your surroundings or actual experience and then are often left not knowing what to do when left, again, to your own devices. Questioning is good, but the balance is better. Todays society is more bent on having you learn from their teachings and then not teaching you properly, but expecting you to know what you’re doing, or at the least being able to figure it out quickly.
The best thing you can do is to teach yourself how to learn how to learn, to want to learn and furthermore learn how to teach yourself to be able to teach others to learn in the same manner and that is leadership by example, so you learn how to teach yourself how to lead and lead others in the teaching of themselves how to learn how to lead themselves and others if need be and so on and so forth it is passed around. Just by speaking and answering questions, you do not grant wisdom or reason or common sense, those are earned from experiencing and doing. And, if we do actually commit ourselves to the work at hand, whatever it is, and work hard at it, some times easily, we may be able to then question and have those questions answered adequately for our learning and understanding. There are a lot of things in life and existence that are free, contrary to popular opinion and belief, but the best things are worked for and earned.
Live to learn to live to learn to live.
“But how will they know without a teacher?”–Paul
The teacher must give his knowledge, then disappear so that the student can learn on his own.–Kierkegaard.
Both authority and experience are necessary teachers.