Is "Why is the sky blue?" a philosophical question or scientific?

Question

Why is "Why is the sky blue?" such a common question made by children? And why has that question about the question never been asked before?

Is it that the question is just a cultural artifact, that is, that someone remarked on one child somewhere actually asking that question once, and once written others pick up on the humor of such a deep philosophical question coming from someone so young, and then the humor being propagated through our current culture by the media?

Though many children do go through a 'why' stage, do most children go through this, if not verbally, at least psychologically? And is this cross-cultural?

As a side question, is the question "Why is the sky blue?" truly a question that can be answered by 'why'? Is it really asking for an event sequence description or is it misplacedly asking for a motivated causality (expecting of all events to be initiated by an actor)?

Answer 1

The sky being blue is something that we can all observe daily, but which does not seem to have a clear impact on our lives. So it's something that most adults have learned to take for granted and not question. Children, however, have a tendency to notice things that adults don't, and to ask questions about them. So "why is the sky blue?" is a plausible question for a child to ask.

Although modern science does have some explanations for this, it still stands as a paradigmatic example of a very familiar phenomenon for which most adults neither know nor seek an explanation.

As such, it's also a good stand-in for a philosophical inquiry, since many of those revolve around questioning familiar phenomena or assumptions that the majority of people take for granted.

Answer 2

As someone whose professional life revolved around science, I see this as a scientific question which is asking for an event sequence description. If I were a philosopher, I might think it was philosophical.

At least one of my kids asked that^*, so it must not be a rarity (though that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow.)

*_{I remember having to look up the answer.}

_{I think your question is a false dilemma, btw. Many young children ask questions simply for attention, to try to make a point, to hear themselves speak, etc. But that's the parent in me speaking. Answering in a realm outside of my common experience is difficult.}

Answer 3

The English word "why" has several meanings, thus the question is ambiguous. Aristotle, for example, recognized four kinds of causation. What he would have called the "material" cause is Rayleigh scattering--the different bending of different colors of light in the atmosphere. There might be other material causes from different perspectives; for example, light of blue wavelengths stimulates receptors in the retina differently, and the brain interprets these in a certain way.

If the question is about agentive cause (i.e., "for what purpose"), then we must pre-suppose an agent--whose purpose? Or we might duck the need for an agent with an evolutionary explanation: we evolved a sense of sight with color perception that helped us distinguish the salient features of our world.

Children do indeed like to ask "why". They should be taught to be more specific. :-)

Answer 4

Who's on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

Above and beyond the ambiguity of language there is the ambiguity of human thought, even in a single individual. Put two humans in a room and have them talk and they will inevitably misunderstand both each other and themselves.

The question can be either, depending upon context, intent, cultural indoctrination, etc. In the most literal interpretation, I would argue that the nature of the question depends mainly upon what information the individual asking the question is seeking.