In a same way, 'why' is relative. You cannot ask why without context that we arbitrarily define, and thus the universe just is.
Quite true; it has to be asked and (attempted to be) answered in the same context. Otherwise the answer is juxtaposed to the question/theme and ends up meaningless.
Though related, I ran into this the other day (and I hope I haven't already used this example - it comes to mind and always makes me chuckle).
The other day, the guy who owns the empty lot adjacent to my house was moving some piles of dirt to and fro. I didn't pay it much mind, then coming back by the window I see him piling up some rocks and dirt just over the property line, on my side. So I went outside to ask him about it:[INDENT]I ask him, "Why are you putting that on my property?"
He looks confused and says, "Why is it on your property?"
I replied, "... because you put it there"
He boggles for an instant and rephrases, "I mean why do you think its on your property?"
Slightly exasperated, I answer, "... because you just put it there"
Struggling, he finally gets out the question on his mind, "Why do you think *that's* your property?"
From there we were able to come to an agreement.
[/INDENT]The point is: There's often a disconnects in these lines of questioning. Typically I'll see the "how" as a method (as in "how to") and the "why" as a suggested or believed 'causal' attribution. When we get that "Oh, you know what I mean"-kind of feeling we'll descry "Oh, that's just semantics!". But aren't words all we have?