Arguing for Questions

People sometimes argue for questions, as can be verified by a Web search using as search terms phrases consisting of a conclusion indicator and an interrogative particle (such as “so why” or “how then”). These arguments provide a reason for asking the question and thus try to establish that it needs to be answered. Typically, they do so either in order to motivate interest in discovering the answer or in order to challenge addressees or a third party to explain their behaviour. The “inferential erotetic logic” of the Polish logician Andrzej Wiśniewski provides a basis for evaluating the inferences in such arguments. For an inference from one or more statements to a question to be valid, the statements and the context must entail that the question has a true answer without entailing that any particular answer is true. Further, there must be a point to asking the question, such as the addressees’ ignorance of the correct answer(s) to it; this requirement may be a pragmatic rather than a semantic constraint. Wiśniewski’s logic also covers inferences from questions (possibly supplemented by declarative sentences) to questions, but humans rarely articulate such inferences; this part of his logic is applicable to problem solving and proof theory rather than to arguments for questions.