I think that it is a matter of speculation whether 'all philosophy questions are rhetorical questions.' which we may ask are rhetorical or much more. I know that I ask a lot of questions, and I am aware that many of them are extremely difficult to find answers to. They are asked with a view to starting discourse and some genuine attempt to find some kind of answers but I am aware of how many of the real metaphysical questions don't have any clear ones.

I know that you often call me 'Truthseeker', and this is partly the case because I do spend a lot of time thinking about issues, especially the question of life after death. However, I think that at times I am even afraid of a clear answer. I am partly afraid of nothing beyond death, but, equally, afraid of what any possible afterlife may be as well. I have spent a lot of time dwelling on the question, because I think that it matters so much whether we are mortal or immortal. But the paradox is that I would probably be shocked if there was a proven answer, even though I know that you and many others do believe that it is obvious that there is no life after death.

But, I have often thought that I don't wish to spend chunks of time reading and thinking on the question of life after death rather than living a life. This probably applies to many of the philosophy questions, including the mind and body one. The problem may be that some of us can't help but do that. It may be that some human beings are hardwired to be rhetorical creatures.

The important thing for a philosopher is not answer questions but to get the meaning of the question quite clear. — Bertrand Russell

Following is an anecdote the great Bertrand Russell relates in an interview:

Old man: Winchester?

Barman: Aye.

Old man: The way to Winchester?

Barman: Aye.

Old man: The shortest way to Winchester?

Barman: Aye.

Old man: Don't know!

Philosophy is about understanding the questions, not answering them. — Bertrand Russell

Wait, don't answer that question. — Anonymous

Mr. Smith, you don't have to answer that question. — Anonymous

You had to ask. — Anonymous

Broadly speaking, a non-rhetorical question is a request for information (i.e. ignorance made visible); a philosophical question, however, is a request for clarification (i.e. implicit assumptions (biases, confusions, non-rhetorical questions) made explicit). The latter seeks to understand – reflect upon – 'illusions of knowledge' whereas the former merely seeks to know.

Broadly speaking, a non-rhetorical question is a request for information (i.e. ignorance made visible); a philosophical question, however, is a request for clarification (i.e. implicit assumptions (biases, confusions, non-rhetorical questions) made explicit). The latter seeks to understand – reflect upon – 'illusions of knowledge' whereas the former merely seeks to know. — 180 Proof

:up: :fire: Always a pleasure to read your posts.

In my humble opinion, in line with what you said, before one even tries answering a question (give the information requested) , one must first understand the question and this involves a thorough examination of all the implicit assumptions that are part of the question and having done that make them explicit. This first step invariably necessitates that we get our definitions clarified.

What about definitions critically impact attempts to answer questions?

The Definition Paradox

What is a definition? That's just another way saying define definition but to do that I must already know what a definition is but the question what is a definition? indicates quite clearly that I don't know what a definition is. Thus, I know what a definition is and I don't know what a definitions is.

The Question Paradox

The question, what is a question? indicates that one doesn't know what a question is but then it itself is a question implying that one knows what a questions is. Thus, I know what a question is and I don't know what a question is.

Nec caput nec pedes! :confused:

Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards. — Søren Kierkegaard

And to live is to be questioned (tested), not answered.

What is a definition? — TheMadFool

The sense of 'definition' is described rather than defined.

The question, what is a question?

Pseudo. Shown not said. (Witty)

Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.
— Søren Kierkegaard
And to live is to be questioned (tested), not answered. — 180 Proof

Indeed! The past (lived) in terms of questions, is filled with answers to questions like, what should I do?, what should I say? Whether the answers were right/wrong becomes clearer only in hindsight which, as they say, is 20/20 but this although critical for learning (from success & failure) is, insofar aa the gist of the OP matters, not as important as the fact that such questions were answered as best as circumstances would permit.

The present (living), however, in thrall of an uncertain future, is the same questions but sans the answers. Thus, we're all, in the present, as you said, tested/questioned.

Arguably then questions, essentially doubt or like you put it "ignorance made visible", their fundamental nature, can be likened temporally to the future which, all things said and done, is the acme of uncertainty. The bottom line is asking a question (what is x?) is the exact same thing as contemplating the future - of both we're unsure/uncertain/ignorant.

What is a definition?
— TheMadFool
The sense of 'definition' is described rather than defined. — 180 Proof

I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not easy, like all paradoxes, to wrap my head around this conundrum.

The Definition Paradox
Definitions

1. Dog: A domesticated wolf. No problems as far as I can tell.

2. Definition (of words): The meaning (definition) of words. Problem! Circularity! It's like saying dog is dog.

The question, what is a question?
Pseudo. Shown not said. (Witty) — 180 Proof

I humbly beg to differ. Every statement ever made, is made, or will be made is an answer to a question. So, the (your) assertion that a "...question is a request for information..." is an answer to the question, what is a question? but this itself is a question implying you already know what a question is but then by posing the question, what is a question?, you're stating that you don't know what a question is. Hence the paradox.

If you ask a native speaker the rules of their language, they may have trouble articulating them because for them they follow the rules automatically. They don't consult the rules consciously.

Likewise I know how to use my legs, but I don't know how I know.

I think this pattern applies to philosophy generally. We implicitly know the laws of logic, the laws of mind, etc, and we use philosophy to make the implicit explicit.

You make a good point. Many physical actions humans can perform happen, let's just say, in the background - much like phone apps and what we're conscious of in a given moment (like the browser I'm using to visit TPF and make this post) is just a tiny fraction of all the apps that are open (in the background).

It's only the tip of the mental iceberg that we're really aware of. Thus, philosophy's task is to closely examine those aspects of mind that are hidden below the surface - the intricacies of our brain's auto-pilot feature as it were - which, to my reckoning, is what making the "...implicit explicit..." is all about.

What I find most intriguing and equally puzzling is the visible one-tenth of the mental iceberg which, all said and done, aims for perfection (clarity, logical rigor to name a few) is radically different from the invisible nine-tenth of the mental iceberg which, to my surprise, is not only just content but also smug about its imperfections (fuzzy, logical rigor ignored and so on).

I tried to think of the perfect words to describe the situation and I got stuck! Interesting! No?

No paradoxes, just questionable premises.

No paradoxes, just questionable premises. — 180 Proof

Definition Paradox

X: What is a definition?
Y: You know.
X: I don't. That's why I ask.
Y: You use the words, "what" and "is". If so, you know their definitions and that means you know what a definition is. Ergo, to formulate the question, you must know what a definition is but the question itself implies you don't know what a definition is. Paradox.

Question paradox

V: What is a question?
W: You know.
V: I don't. That's why I ask.
W: You asked a question implying you know what a question is. The question itself suggests that you don't know what a question is. Paradox.