“In old tales — and usually in our new ones too — no one becomes invisible without a motive. It’s the peculiarity of our times that we focus on means and not the motive.” Philip Ball, Invisible.

I hadn’t really considered this, means versus motive in our modern era, til this bit of Ball’s book.  I suppose in the past, when means was unknown, or guessed at, or fabricated, motive could have been less slippery? With the changes in technology and science in the past millenia, we know more about means, though really, still far less than we think we know.

Do we head more towards the how than the why, in our modern enquiries?