an answer exists for all existing questions — Daniel

I don’t agree with that.

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

↪tim wood so, no questions without answers? — Daniel

Let's define an answer as that which changes a question from being unanswered to answered. Pretty clearly there a lots of possible responses to questions that by this standard are not answers.

Are there questions without answers? Dunno. I can't offhand think of any. Am I missing somethiing obvious? Because that sometimes happens. What do you say?

If a question is that which arises from the interaction of what was not known* with the self, then the answer must be what causes what was not known (broadly speaking). In this case, to say that a question has no answer would be the same as to say that that which was not known has no cause (and like you, I cannot think of anything that has such quality). However, is it right to assume that every question arises from the interaction of something which is not known with the self?

*Assuming that that which is not known becomes known as soon as it interacts, directly or indirectly, with the self. You can know something without understanding it.

Why not?

Answered already.

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? — Daniel

That reeks of private language...

I was actually thinking, not of a question that had been thought but not spoken, so much as a question that had not been thought.

Ipso fact, its a question.

But the thrust of my point is to show the poverty of the @Daniel's OP; speaking of questions existing or not existing is misguided.

Ok. Then let me ask you. What are the requirements for a question to be expressed? I just want a list of the things that you think are needed to express a question. Certainly, there are things that are required for a question to be expressed (i.e., language). What's in your list? Also, taking into account the fact that you cannot express a question if there is not a question to express, how does the question to be expressed becomes an object of that which expresses it?

Not sure what you are asking here, but if you are after a list of the logical requirements for asking question, Searle does an excellent job in his Intentionality.

I just want a list of the things you think are required to express a question. A list that is as comprehensive as you can make it.
Also, I'd like to read the essay... do you have any digital copies of it?

nvm, just found the book.

Arck, my bad . It's Speech acts, a table on pp 66-7.

Time for you to tell us exactly what you think question is, or how you define it (pace Banno), for your purpose here.

I'll offer this, which may seem oblique (and again, this isn't mine). Every statement that anyone ever makes is an answer to some question. That is, inquiry gives rise to statements, and the statements are answers to the question of the inquiry. And none this has to be formally spoken out loud or written. But to the degree that anyone is attempting to think in an organized way, their inquiries and statements can be laid out in an organized way. I am more usually an unorganized thinker, so my thoughts often wander like a dog visiting his local round of telephone poles. I like cake, is that the water boiling, did someone eat the leftovers, it's got chilly, I should close the window, and so forth. But if I set myself to it, I can organize this "thinking" of mine into question and answer, very likely much of it sub-vocal.

missing knowledge on the part of the asker and a request for information from someone else.

Also:

When 2 people are arguing it is very often easier to counter someones argument with a question (similar to Jeopardy). Forcing the debate opponent to pump blood to his/her brain to answer the question gives you time to counter their notion (that you don't like). If they answer with a bad answer you can then attack their answer.

This tactic predates Jesus Christ even though this tactic is associated with him. It probably even predates the oldest (supposedly oldest) book in the Bible (Book of Job).

For complex issues its easier to get your debate opponent to mess up in his/her logic if he/she can't nail down the concepts that are apart of the greater picture.

You could say the people involved in the debate are using this tactic because they are gambling (unknown variables) on whether the "opponent" fully understands the issue. If the "opponent" does fully understand the issue thats when the person asking the question might be put in check or check mate.

It all depends on whether the opponent or me or you fully understands the problem. Ofcourse you would agree if you or i fully understand or atleast to a great degree understand the problem its easier to come to the right conclusion.

I believe in absolute truth but i believe it is often hard to come to the right conclusion given Human's short life spans and limited testing abilities.

I do not know what a question is, hence why I want to find all the things that define a question. So far, I believe the most important requirement for a question to exist is a body that is able to detect/perceive/experience change; that is, for a question to become an object of one's mind (to exist in the mind/to appear in the mind), one must be able to distinguish between previous experiences and what is being newly experienced (or what was unknown). More precisely, one must be able to distinguish between what one has experienced in the past and what one just experienced for the first time (a change between what is known and what is not known is perceived). For this, the capacity of memory would be required, and thus memory is also a requirement for the existence of questions.

So, in summary, I'would say a question arises in the mind when the self is affected by a novel experience AND the self is able to tell that it has never had such experience (how?) AND the self is able to communicate such novel encounter (communicate to what? I have no idea-I'd say itself, but how would the self act on itself?) so that in the process of communicating the novel encounter, the question arises.

Another requirement is that which is unknown and which becomes the subject of the nascent question right after it is experienced for the first time, for example.

Like these requirements there are many more (i.e., language, which would be required to communicate the novel experience). Many of you might think these requirements to be obvious, and they are; I mean, there would not be questions if there is nothing unknown, right? Nonetheless, I want to revisit them because I think this "obviousness" hides more than what it lets us see. That's the reason for most of my questions here, tbh. When I ask your opinion is because I believe each of us hides some truth, truth that no one else can access, truth that is as valuable as the one professed by great philosophers.

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

It’s a result of effort and attention.

1. For a question to exist there has to be initial dissatisfaction with something given as unchangeable cruel truth. Example: Why should all people die?
2. For a question to exist there has to be desire to approve continuation of pleasurable life flow. Example, child is asking her parent: Mom, is life going to be the same every year? You taking me to kinder garden, I am playing all day, then you taking me home?

Foe the question to exist , it requires not knowing and wanting to know or knowing and wanting to find better outcome than the knowledge implies.

not knowing and wanting to know — Victoria Nova

What causes the want (the desire) to know?

One desires to know, because knowing is the result of successful thinking process. Thus finding the answer to existing problem feels good, it works as positive reinforcement for asking a question.

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

A question, being a concept, needs a vehicle to be projected into existence and a potency to make the vehicle project it. From "Non Being" it needs a "Being" with "Purpose" to "Become".

"What does a question require to exist?"

Beautiful question. The answer is obvious, a functioning human brain coupled with social knowledge.