Questions of Why

—Rumination on a turth philosopher’s chance encounter with a ket.

Information

Class: Philosophy & Religion
Wc: 382

Publishing

Aut: Kel-Crise
Dt: 271 A.T.
Ogn: N/A

Related Links

I have stumbled upon a Kettlah recently who elicited several questions from the inner workings of my mind. These questions predominantly dealt with the motivation – the why of him. He claimed to be able to see into the future – a claim I did not refute but instead attempted to test. I asked him what he had seen of the future, and he replied that he had yet not seen, but has seen that he has seen the where but not when of the matter. Perplexed, I enquired further but instead he left me with two possibilities:

He could continue on to the where and wait for the when
He could continue on with his life and likely happen upon the where in the when

He seemed inclined to choose the latter and I the former. His rationale when prompted with another why from myself was that if he had already seen himself in the where, and his vision contained the when, then it will happen and there is no use traveling with haste to the where only to find himself not in the when. I countered with a thought – what would happen if before he reached the where, the when came and passed him. He nodded and left me with one last phrase:

“It will come to be.”

This perplexes I. Having poured over this encounter for many a light I now pen my thoughts to the hope that another can make sense of what I cannot. How can one contain so much certainty whilst at the same time embracing the unknown? His trust of his vision implied more than just a dream-thought from the Kettlah, but why would one both possess the ability to see the future, yet only be able to see themselves seeing this future. Why would one be so certain of this exchange of uncertainty, is it possible that he had seen himself having this vision of seeing himself? If his visions are concentric, then why would one persist if nothing useful comes to pass? To answer that question, I would posit that he either values the concentricity or believes these visions of visions useful in some way, yet this leads me back to why one would put trust in the uncertainty contained herein.

Why?