I am just remembering my University Class Environment in Aachen many years back. It is a story about my Philosophy Professor at the time who gave us an unusual test that threw us off guard.

It was a great experience to be part of a class of intellectuals at the time. Besides goofing off half of the time we sat in bars slamming down beers and chatting about our interpertation of philosophical questions at the time. Of course what we should have done is bury our noses into books throughout the semesters and not at the last moment, yet nevertheless we studied what we could on the different philosophies and religions before the exam came around.

And yes we stayed up ridiculously late studying and then the day came as we go into class to take the test. In our heads we are going over the material again and again, knowing that this will be a written exam. To our surprise my professor enters the room, goes straight to the board, and writes...

Why?

He then sits down, opens a book, and starts to read.

Panic sets in; we look around helplessly at each other. We wonder if this is some kind of joke. But its' not. The teacher continues to read, and we begin to write everything we know about everything we've studied, all except for one Joachin Schneider. I will never forget his name. lol

He would look thoughtfully at the board for a few moments, writes a few words down on paper, then turns his test in, leaving. The professor continues to read.

We all look at the door as it closes with an ominous thud. "Well, guess he really didn't care," we thought and go back to writing.

Grades come in a month later. The majority of us get D's of C's on our exams, all except for one, he received an A. Not to hard to guess which student that one was.

That student's answer was...

Why not?

Was this a sarcastic answer that the professor found amusing? No
This is the actual answer to a philosophy teacher's question. Why not? Seems simple enough, right?
In the mind of a philosophy professor, this answer is packed with so much information that hundreds of books have been written about them and the things they relate too, modern music relates to them, all of humanity seems to be caught up in the "why not" without even knowing it. And I say it is perhaps the greatest danger to society today.

"Philosophy can be nothing more then the study of wisdom and TRUTH..."

Now I have come to the next question. What is truth? Hmmm another question with hundreds of answers.

So my question to you is “Why?”

Ive heard this story countles times, this professor really gets around, or enjoys this. I think its just a story. However by simply asking why not, you confront the questioner with his own presumptions and definitions, in a sence reversing the ambigouity back to the questioner. This in essence force the asker to analyze his own line of thinking or suppistions as well as saterically saying we both understand this subjective concept. Another version I heard was a philosophy professor's final exam, where he placed a chair in front of the class and aswked themn to prove its existance. Same story line where someones responce and paper consists of, "what chair?" Again getting the same result as the asker has already definited that it does indeed exist. SOme suggested placing just your name on paper and leaving it on the chair. Or perhaps hitting him over the head with it. That is pretty irrifutatble. These questions are common in philosophy as they are exercizes to develop a philosophical therory proving or whether its possible at all to prove anything completely subjectively. This story was so popular they even did a beer commercail for it.

As for truth, I'm not certain of any, or that there is a ultimate perspective because by its very nature ultimate exludes subjectivty. You may resort to 2+2=4 but there are places and times where this is not so. Subatomic particles are a good example as well as black holes. Our perspective and apperatus for percieveoing the world was fastioned and shaped by evolution for the sole purpose of survival. Truth to man is nothing more than collective agreements especailly in reagrds to abstract concepts like morality. Truth implies absolute, however theroretically there is no absolute 100% of the time, and if there is wsuch a thing it is beyond subjectivity which is inescapable.