[BSEdlMMldESB]

my much less informed take on this topic:

I considered "why?", "what?", and "how to?" by thinking the types of answers:

'what' expects an answer of a name, or reference.

'how' expects an answer of a recipe, like an algorithm possibly

'why' is more complicated, it involves intention. to keep it simple (and short), it's a mix of both of the above, but I provide no references nor bibliography; and quite honestly, I didn't even read through that whole 14-17 minute long article. at a glance, I am saying something roughly similar, but without knowing about all those academic erudites, and without invoking such arcane terminology as "teleological"

[polarix]

Purpose is a really helpful way of organizing thought about the world.

But “purposeful” does not mean “having to do with the concept of purpose”, so “teleological” ends up being a pretty useful word. Despite the smell of old books it carries.

[_a_a_a_]

> 'what' expects an answer of a name, or reference.

that's a 'who'

[BSEdlMMldESB]

counter example: what is this website called?

you're telling me Hacker News is a who?