What could possibly obligate me when the discussion of obligation itself is ruled by already-assumed statements which have no obligation issue because they are necessarily used to talk about the idea of obligation?
Is there anything that really obligates belief in something? Is it merely a prior committment to act according to a set of rules? Do we have a built-in prior commitment or bias to think and act in a certain way while rejecting all other ways, however provisional that bias might be in principle? Belief in obligating factors of mind, for example.
Why is any question an appropriate object of thought? And what are the irreducible statements assumed in order to know what a question is?
Is there a set of statements that rule all thought without exception? How do we live in relation to them? And would that imply anything about their role in how we are defined as an object that questions? What exactly am I, in asking or thinking about a question, other than being merely a question-asking object?
And are all my actions carried out based on an already believed-in hierarchy of universalized values?