8 Great Philosophical Questions We May Never Answer

Some questions resist every tool we have. Why does anything exist? Is the world real? Do we choose freely? Is there a God, or life after death? Can we ever step outside our own minds? What makes an action right, and what exactly is a number? These eight puzzles have occupied philosophers for centuries, and they remain open because evidence alone cannot settle them.

Science answers questions by observation and experiment. Philosophy works where those methods run out, by clarifying concepts, testing arguments and exposing hidden assumptions. That does not make philosophical questions idle. Thinking them through sharpens how we reason about science, ethics, religion and our own lives, even if a final answer never arrives. Here is what each question asks, the main positions people take, and why it is so stubborn.

Questions about existence and reality

1. Why is there something rather than nothing?

The German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz posed this question directly in 1714, in Principles of Nature and Grace. Every day we take for granted a universe full of galaxies, northern lights and cartoon sponges, governed by remarkably precise physical laws. Yet nothing obviously requires any of it to exist.

There are three broad kinds of answer. Leibniz argued that the universe needs a sufficient reason, which he found in God as a necessary being. Others, from Bertrand Russell to physicist Sean Carroll, accept that the universe may simply be a brute fact, with no deeper explanation. Some physicists, such as Lawrence Krauss, point to quantum effects in which particles appear from a vacuum; critics such as philosopher Edward Feser reply that a quantum vacuum is already something, governed by laws, so the original question remains. The anthropic principle adds a twist: we can only observe a universe that allows observers, which explains why we see these conditions but not why there are any conditions at all.

2. Is our universe real?

René Descartes, in the 17th century, imagined an all-powerful “evil demon” feeding him a false world. Later philosophers updated the image to a brain kept alive in a vat and wired to a computer. In 2003 the Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom gave the idea its modern form in his paper “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?”. He argued that at least one of three things is probably true: almost no civilisations reach the technology to run detailed simulations of their ancestors; almost none that could would choose to; or we are very likely living in such a simulation.

The trouble is that any evidence we gather would come from inside the system being questioned. Some philosophers respond that a world that is coherent, lawful and shared is real in every sense that matters to us, whatever lies beneath it. Science fiction fans will recall the character Cypher in The Matrix, who decided that a comfortable illusion beat a harsh reality, a choice the film invites us to question.

Questions about the mind

3. Do we have free will?

If every event, including every thought, is caused by earlier events, it seems our choices were fixed long before we made them. That view is determinism. If instead some events are uncaused, our choices might simply be random, which hardly sounds like freedom either.

Philosophers split into camps. Hard determinists say free will is an illusion. Libertarians in the metaphysical sense (nothing to do with politics) say we are free and that determinism must therefore be false. Compatibilists, a third and today very common position, argue that freedom means acting on your own reasons without coercion, which can be true even in a deterministic world. Neuroscience has joined the debate. In 1983 Benjamin Libet recorded brain activity starting a fraction of a second before people reported deciding to move. Later researchers, including Aaron Schurger and colleagues in 2012, argued that this signal may reflect random neural fluctuations rather than a hidden decision, and that simple finger movements tell us little about deliberate choices. There is still no consensus.

4. Can you experience anything objectively?

Everything you know reaches you through senses and a brain. Philosophers call the felt quality of an experience, such as the redness of red or the taste of coffee, “qualia”. John Locke wondered whether two people might see colours swapped yet behave identically. In 1974 Thomas Nagel asked “What is it like to be a bat?” to show that science describes behaviour from the outside but struggles to capture experience from the inside. Frank Jackson’s 1982 thought experiment about Mary, a colour scientist raised in a black-and-white room, asks whether she learns something new when she first sees red.

David Chalmers later named this the “hard problem of consciousness”: explaining why physical processes feel like anything at all. We can study the world objectively, through shared measurements and instruments, but each of us still lives inside one point of view. Buddhist philosophy approaches a related idea through the teaching of emptiness, while Plato took almost the opposite route, holding that reason can reach perfect, objective Forms.

Questions about God and what comes after

5. Does God exist?

This may be the most argued-over question in history. Classic arguments for God include the idea of a first cause, the apparent fine-tuning of physical constants and the existence of moral law. Arguments against include the problem of suffering and the fact that natural processes explain more of the world than ever before. Between theism and atheism lie positions such as deism, where a creator sets the universe going and then steps back, and agnosticism, which holds that the question cannot be settled with the evidence available.

Part of the difficulty is that God, as most traditions describe him, is not a physical object that experiments could detect. That moves the question from laboratories to arguments about logic, experience and meaning, where thoughtful people continue to reach different conclusions. Respecting that disagreement is part of taking the question seriously.

6. Is there life after death?

No one has returned with a verifiable report. Religions offer many answers, from resurrection to reincarnation to union with the divine. Materialists hold that consciousness depends on the brain and ends with it, a view supported by how closely mental life tracks brain function, though it remains a philosophical position rather than a proven fact.

Some speculative ideas come from physics. The roboticist Hans Moravec and, later, physicist Max Tegmark described a thought experiment sometimes called “quantum immortality”, based on the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, in which some version of an observer always survives. Most physicists and philosophers regard it as unsupported, and Tegmark himself later rejected it. Carl Sagan’s description of the cosmos as all that is, was or ever will be reminds us how much remains unknown, but that is not the same as evidence for an afterlife.

Questions about value and abstraction

7. What is the best moral system?

Philosophers have offered powerful rival theories. Consequentialists judge actions by their results, such as how much happiness or suffering they cause. Deontologists, following Immanuel Kant, focus on duties and rules, such as never treating people merely as tools. Virtue ethicists, following Aristotle, ask what a good person would do. Each captures something important, and each produces uncomfortable results in certain cases.

Even the Golden Rule, found in many cultures, has critics. Kant objected that it ignores differences of situation: a convicted criminal could use it to argue that a judge should not sentence him, since the judge would not want to be sentenced. Thought experiments such as the trolley problem, first set out by Philippa Foot in 1967, show how strongly people’s intuitions shift when details change. Moral views have also changed over history, which suggests ethics is partly a work in progress rather than a finished code.

8. What are numbers?

We use numbers constantly, yet no one has ever tripped over the number seven. Platonists hold that numbers and other mathematical objects really exist, outside space and time. Formalists, such as David Hilbert, treated mathematics as the manipulation of symbols according to rules. Nominalists and fictionalists, such as Hartry Field, argue that numbers are useful fictions, a bit like characters in a novel.

The puzzle deepens because mathematics works so well. In 1960 the physicist Eugene Wigner wrote of the “unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences”. If numbers are human inventions, why do they describe planets and particles so precisely? If they are real but abstract, how do our brains come to know them? Philosopher Paul Benacerraf sharpened that second question, and it remains unresolved.

Why unanswerable does not mean pointless

It is tempting to dismiss questions without final answers as a waste of time. History suggests otherwise. Questions about motion, matter and life were once purely philosophical; careful thinking about them helped create physics, chemistry and biology. Debates about free will shape how courts treat responsibility. Arguments about consciousness guide how we think about animals and artificial intelligence.

A few common myths are worth setting aside. Philosophy is not just opinion: arguments can be better or worse, and many proposed answers have been shown to fail. Science and philosophy are not enemies; physicists, neuroscientists and philosophers increasingly work on the same questions. And “we may never know” is not the same as “anything goes”. Knowing which answers do not work is real progress.

The best way to engage with these eight questions is to try out the arguments on both sides, notice which assumptions you hold without realising it, and stay open to changing your mind. The questions may outlast us, but thinking about them changes the people who ask.

Sources: Inspired by George Dvorsky, “8 Great Philosophical Questions That We’ll Never Solve”, io9/Gizmodo (2012); Why there is anything at all; Simulation hypothesis; Libertarianism (metaphysics); Benjamin Libet; Qualia; Quantum suicide and immortality; Golden Rule; Philosophy of mathematics (all Wikipedia).

Related:

• 10 Mind-Blowing Theories That Will Change Your Perception of the World
• Albert Einstein - How I See the World
• The Three Filters: A Story Attributed to Socrates
• The Quantum Activist: Amit Goswami’s View of Consciousness
• The 10 Inventions of Nikola Tesla That Changed The World
• What If Everything You Were Ever Taught Was A Lie?
• 10 Painfully Obvious Truths Everyone Forgets Too Soon
• Here Are 35 Things You Probably Believe… But Are Total Lies. Everything You Thought Is Wrong
• 10 Simple Things You Can Do Today That Will Make You Happier, Backed By Science
• 13 Habits Discussed in Mental-Strength Advice
• A Quote Gallery for Reflection and Conversation
• It will take just 1 minute to read this and change your thinking.
• A Reflection on Choices, Consequences and Comparison