What's necessary for a question to exist? — Daniel

A question mark?

You can map some questions to statements which have binary (maybe trinary , etc...) truth values:

Is the cat black?

Maps to:

The cat is black (with a truth value of true or false).

You can map some questions to statements which have binary (maybe trinary , etc...) truth values:

Is the cat black?

Maps to:

The cat is black (with a truth value of true or false). — Devans99

That is an over simplification. truth values only have logical meaning in abstract systems.

There are many varieties of 'black' in the real world.

There are many varieties of 'black' in the real world — A Seagull

You could use discrete or fuzzy true values:

- The question 'Is the cat is light, medium or dark black?' maps to a trinary kind of truth value.
- 'What are the chances the cat is pitched black?' maps to a fuzzy truth value.

You mean an interrogative accent? oral questions do not need question marks to exist if by question mark you mean "?".

What's necessary for a question to exist? — Daniel

What’s necessary for a question, is an unknown that relates to it. What’s necessary for a question to exist, I suppose, is just the expression of it.

You can map some questions to statements which have binary (maybe trinary , etc...) truth values:

Is the cat black?

Maps to:

The cat is black (with a truth value of true or false). — Devans99

Do you mean a question needs an answer to exist?

Consciousness.

(aka, what is self-awareness.)

An unknown that relates to it. — Mww

I agree. I'd like to ask you, how would you say the unknown relates to the question? How is a question something about what is unknown? Does the unknown act directly on the question or does it act on something else from which the question then arises? (they are all kind of the same question)

Consciousness.

(aka, what is self-awareness.) — 3017amen

I agree with you. I'd like to know why you think questions need self-awareness to exist? what is it in a nascent question which requires self-awareness for such process to exist (to begin; to continue)?

how would you say the unknown relates to the question? — Daniel

I guess....in the most basic sense, the query presupposes the conception in the subject of the response relates directly to the conception in the subject in the query. The response “the color of the dining room is 14ft”, is incoherent with respect to the question “what color is the dining room?”.

A question mark? — A Seagull

And the Mysterians!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%3F_and_the_Mysterians

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

What does anything require to exist. I don't know or ever personally witnessed 7 billion people. Doesn't mean they don't.

Perhaps this is a non answer (I always dislike those) but I suppose having the state or property of existence. Lol. It either does or it doesn't. No observation or reference will change that. A question as a literal object ie. a verbal or written inquiry or a concept? Concepts are more interesting. What if there were no humans here. The question of why are they not exists. Even here and now why aren't there giant firebreathing dragons here for example is a question. Maybe the answer is "because they don't exist", an answered question still "exists" .. or does it?

I agree with you. I'd like to know why you think questions need self-awareness to exist? — Daniel

Good question. It appears that most if not all lower life forms are not self-aware enough to wonder about things and ask questions. The metrics of instinct, versus the intellect in human consciousness, obviously leans toward instinct being subordinate to intellect. And so for whatever reason the intellect that is predominant in human's provides for the ability to ask questions.

This leads to other questions. For example, if self-awareness is the driving force behind the existence of questions, what is the purpose of asking questions? (What is the purpose of self-awareness and intellect?) The ability to ask questions themselves do not appear to offer survival value for lower/higher life forms. Accordingly, instinct and genetically coded emergent properties are all that's needed.

what is it in a nascent question which requires self-awareness for such process to exist (to begin; to continue)? — Daniel

Conservation of energy.

An unknown that relates to it.
— Mww

↪Mww I agree. I'd like to ask you, how would you say the unknown relates to the question? How is a question something about what is unknown? Does the unknown act directly on the question or does it act on something else from which the question then arises? (they are all kind of the same question) — Daniel

Not necessarily a specific unknown, rather a fuzziness or uncertainty to the information. A question is an expression of potentiality. It presents uncertain or incomplete information as a transferable prediction of effort and attention distribution to complete the potential information.

So the question, “what colour is the dining room?” presents incomplete potential information regarding a particular value - colour - attributed to a particular ‘dining room’. Regardless of whether this specific information is available - ie. whether or not the missing information is ‘unknown’ or unknowable by either the questioner or the questionee - the question itself exists as an expression of missing potential information, to be answered by the questionee relating their subjective experience to the information as presented, and responding with a colour value to complete the information as a shared relation or ‘superposition’ state between them.

Alternatively, the question, “Is the dining room red?” also presents incomplete potential information regarding a particular value - colour - attributed to a particular ‘dining room’. What is missing is not a colour value, however, but rather the questionee relating their subjective experience to the information as presented, and responding with a binary truth value (yes/no - and/or an alternative colour value) to complete the information as a shared relation between them.

Well, that wasn’t simple or concise. Sorry.

There are no unexpressed questions?

There are no unexpressed questions? — Banno

If it has not been expressed - even to the self, in the form of thought - can it be defined as a ‘question’?

Well, if it is an unexpressed question, ipso facto it is a question...

It’s commonly referred to as ‘doubt’.

I guess....in the most basic sense, the query presupposes the conception in the subject of the response relates directly to the conception in the subject in the query. The response “the color of the dining room is 14ft”, is incoherent with respect to the question “what color is the dining room?”. — Mww

I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say. I understand you are saying that the question, the unknown which causes the question, and its response are all logically (causally?) related. Is this what you mean? If it is, what is it that judges the quality of their relationship? What is it that says: "this response is not of this question?"

A question presupposes that which it asks of. That is, a question is logically prior to it's own answer. (Not mine, source on request; I'm too lazy to find it at the moment.) — tim wood

so, no questions without answers?

Conservation of energy. — 3017amen

the effect of the unknown (or anything else) on the body dissipates in the form of ideas?

Anyways, that's not the topic of this discussion. I am asking you what it is in the self awareness of an individual which is required for the existence of questions?

how are you aware of the incomplete potential information that a question presents?

I am asking you what it is in the self awareness of an individual which is required for the existence of questions? — Daniel

Think of ideas themselves (or wonderment) as part of a metaphysical agency or energy, manifested by or from our natural stream of consciousness. Ideas come to us at random, for us to then pick and choose... .

Well, if it is an unexpressed question, ipso facto it is a question... — Banno

You are thinking about the idea of an unexpressed question (which is not an unexpressed question but an idea of one), but you are not thinking about the unexpressed question itself. Thinking requires that you communicate something to yourself. If not communicated at least to the self, can a question exist?

Still not answering the question I asked you. There must be something that turns the metaphysical substance (energy) in your theory into physical ideas (or something you recognize). What is it? How do you become aware of the question?

There must be something that turns the metaphysical substance (energy) in your theory into physical ideas (or something you recognize). What is it? How do you become aware of the question? — Daniel

Great questions. I think you are referring to what is called the hard problem of consciousness. The common examples include, but are not limited to, the perception of the color red, metaphysical identity/what's it like to be a bat, etc.. This phenomena is similar to the metaphysical nature of conscious existence.

Meaning, it seems this sense of wonderment/metaphysical agency/energy that appears in our stream of consciousness is naturally existential. Questions, originate from our innate sense of wonderment. In short, you become aware of questions through your being self-aware from consciousness.

Do these questions have physical images associated with them as contained in our stream of consciousness? Yes they do. But some don't. Some questions appear as sentient impulses.. And that sentience takes the form of the will; metaphysical will in nature. (Have you read Schopenhauer?)

I understand you are saying that the question, the unknown which causes the question, and its response are all logically (causally?) related. — Daniel

Not necessarily; it is possible for a question not to have an answer, in which case the question seeking an unknown remains unsatisfied, and logical relation becomes moot. But to be a legitimate question, that is, one for which the answer is both possible and rational, then the one must directly relate to the other.

But a finer point might be that unknowns don’t cause questions necessarily, merely from being an unknown in general. Such is the strictly minor fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, which says because there are unknowns therefore there are questions, which is not always the case. Being coincident with is very far from being causality for.
——————-

If it is, what is it that judges the quality of their relationship? — Daniel

As my ol’ buddy Connor MacLeod....you know...the Highlander, says.....there can be only one. In this case, only the inquirer may be the judge.

So, we could say that a question requires an unknown associated/related to it, a subject that recognizes what is unknown, and the expression of the question by such subject so that it can exist. However, a question does not need a perceivable response/explanation to exist (the question can exist without me knowing the answer to the question, but an answer exists for all existing questions). Do you agree with this? What would you change? Try to be concise.