Final answer:
Questioning the alethic and deontic modalities separately when analyzing a statement allows for clarity and avoids confusion between different types of necessity and possibility. This approach is crucial in modal epistemology and provides a nuanced understanding of the conditions and normative aspects behind the concepts of possibility and obligation.
Step-by-step explanation:
When analyzing the statement 'it is possible and obligatory that the man is eloquent', questioning modalities separately can provide more clarity and prevent conflating different kinds of necessity and possibility. In this case, the alethic modality concerns what is possible, while the deontic modality relates to what is obligatory. For modal epistemology, which studies knowledge of possibility and necessity, such separation is crucial. Asking 'Why is it possible that the man is eloquent?' investigates the conditions and circumstances that make elocution a possibility for this individual, which is distinct from the reasons why it is obligatory.
On the other hand, 'Why is it obligatory that the man is eloquent?' focuses on normative aspects, possibly including social, moral, or professional imperatives that demand eloquence. This approach of dissecting the question supports a more nuanced understanding without imposing biases or suggesting particular right or wrong answers, allowing us to give due attention to a why question for this reason. Offering coherent reasoning behind both aspects of modality provides a broader and more precise exploration of the concepts involved.