If you are given some statement about anything, and ask of the statement, ‘why?’ and they answer you with another statement, and you again ask of this, ‘why?’ and this cycle continues for a few turns until the answer they give cannot be explained further if asked ‘why?’, will this last answer be the same regardless of the subject of the beginning statement?

And I have a question just now: how can we tell at what point the answer given cannot be explained further if asked ‘why?’? Should we stop asking ‘why?’ when the most recent answer is identical to the one before it? I think that would be a fine easy way to determine when one should stop asking ‘why?’.

Here is an example: Aeroplanes are the preferred method of long distance travel. Why? They transport people thousands of miles in mere hours. Why? A timely commute is appreciated because traveling people tend to keep busy schedules; appointments and such. Why? Societies have structured the lives of their citizens such that meeting with people and completing tasks within a deadline is looked upon as a good use of time. Why? Humans are unpredictable animals whose curiosity and restlessness led them to create a monstrosity of endless invention/innovation at whose mercy many of them now are. Why? I don’t know. Why? I was not a psychology or philosophy major. Why? I don’t find that kind of thing interesting. Why? I don’t know. Why? I don’t know.

It’s a bit anti-climactic that the answer to which ‘why?’ cannot be asked in the above example is ‘I don’t know,’ but there you have it. I’d also like to clarify that the 1st person narrative statements should not be interpreted to be indicative of what I think. I in fact do find psychology and philosophy engaging subjects.