My mammalian brain still asks where did it come from ? And from this I just realise that this question will never really have a satisfactory answer.

Thoughts ? — Deus

I also don't think there's a satisfactory answer. Assuming the brain has evolved to solve problems (or maybe just the single problem of replication), it's tempting to understand looking for causes in terms of looking for levers and buttons. I want to exploit what I perceive as causal relationships. From this POV, it's tempting to say that 'real' why questions link determinate items to determinate items, all within the causal nexus of reality understood as a web of such items. To ask why there is a causal nexus in the first place is to ask for something within that nexus to explain it, which doesn't make sense to me.

.

I think this a problem for any sphere in which individual actions count for little or nothing but group actions determine the result. Reducing your carbon footprint by 90% or increasing it by 200% will do practically nothing to save or to harm the planet. Having just one cigarette in a pub is not going to give anyone emphysema. Etc. — Cuthbert

Nailed it.

One suggestion has been to count the spoilt ballots, and if the spoilt ballots 'win' all the candidates are barred and a new election with new candidates is held. Politicians invariably reject this idea, and that makes me think it a good idea. — unenlightened

That one got a chuckle out of me.