OK, you have now addressed the issue of why I left Physics as an Undergrad at about 19 years old.
It's the why.
And I think we do know why, or at least the what of the why. You see it clearly, but only in human natural language. The means by which one brain speaks to another brain in the most evolved way possible.
Here you can see the how of the why, which is almost impossible to see in traditional neuroscience or, actually, in what people tell as stories to each other.
It posits another Psi function, but for the psychological function we can observe directly, without inference, as a linguistic predication. The effective properties:
1. One or more linguistic predications can be observed in the hierarchical surface structure of human, natural, language sentences which one human can say and other can observe directly he understands. These invariably are organized as a hierarchy of predications among observations or demonstrations, perceptions or actions.
2. In a further predication context, more sentences, more words, any sentence can be seen as a truth or a lie by another human who can be either its generator or its observer, within the natural language shared by both humans natively. This is central to the why. The why is in order to accomplish this communication. We exist because we thereby can define and agree on reality among ourselves.
3. As Descartes first observed, new questions will be endless because natural language has the capability of endless explanation and deceit and s always testable by new perceptions and demonstrations to provide new ways to organize reality for communication, forever new information content, of the reality. Which we perceive and demontrate as what, in our natural languages embed as causation or agency. Most every verb in every human language is ambiguous, predication context dependent, on agency or causation for its subject. It a 99+% probability that a verb in any natural language has this ambiguous, Necker Cube, type ambiguity.
4. By definition, this is why human reality exists, to be able to agree or disagree in our perceptions and demonstrations as to reality, or causation.
5. The fundamental neural computation appears to be the predication, as it, by this theory, must be.
6. And our brains demonstrate the why only through the natural language out of which we can also evolve other, non-natural, languages for use as parts of our further added natural language sentences such as math. All are devolutions of natural language for answering certain restricted questions, but still comprised of predicated predications. This is the how to get the why.
By definition, for the truth of it.
You cannot have Ontology without Mendaciology. You cannot have knowledge of the truth that always can be made to exist without the lies that always can be made to exist between humans, and, by the way, only humans. As I wrote below based on some still to be tested, but predictable, evidence.
https://medium.com/liecatcher/my-trip-to-death-and-back-11dd5d02d360
That is why we are are here, because water is in the ocean, truth is in reality, one thing leads to another, and we, with unique speed, in time and space, find it.
Just a hypothesis of course. Because it can be tested. But because it can be manifest in direct observation, it may not need math or other deductive frameworks very often.
In predication, any noun can be a verb. Any verb, a noun. And the list goes on through the structural linguistics of paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations of de Saussure. My answer as to why is that it has been plainly in your face unnoticed as wto why it is why, and the why, ends there. Truth and Lies are known by the truth machine (the ‘trust’ machine) itself and there lay the why of it all:
https://medium.com/liecatcher/you-asked-for-it-a0f5b2a467c5
Like the brain (or neural computation) itself. Look no further because there is no further place to actually look scientifically. This is as Descartes plainly stated as the sole theme of his "Method" which we have come to understand in our common parlance as 'empirical knowledge.'
The method is the madness and the "why" of reality as humans can know and be assured there is a why to it. Reality will never be exhausted for predications that predicate it. It is the stuff of that. If it cannot in principle be found in reality, it is not in reality and it is not why we are.
We are precisely at that point when we have a question. Just as you see "electrons" when you look at a mirror, you see reality when you have an answer or a lie. The mirror is part of the answer to why reality is what it is.
.There is a lot more work to do be done in this area. People are just starting.
