You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
-2

[–] lofalexandria [S] 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

For instance, "the sky is blue" is a very well researched and peer reviewed result. But really, who cares...WHY is the sky blue is an interesting question and research topic.

You can not have one without the other. It is not until it is established that the sky is blue that you can begin to explore and understand why it is blue.

For example, in Russian, there is no single word for the color blue as used in English, and this distinction matters because it turns out language influences perception. https://eagereyes.org/blog/2011/you-only-see-colors-you-can-name

You ask questions like, "is the sky blue?", because sometimes the answer is no, and when that happens, you have a whole new avenue of approach for the why portion of the question.

0
0

[–] chakan2 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

And you proved my point...no one cares that its blue...it could be pink, green, red, whatever...but while you are trying to wax elequent on what blue is there's a set of hardcore researchers that found out there's a hole in the ozone layer, another set that found out about global warming, and another set making cloud seeding a reality.

So no, wasting time and resources to state the obvious is not advancing scociety.