You can ask "why".
There's no problem with asking "why".
Sometimes "why" boils down to a set of understandable circumstances resulting in an outcome.
"Why did this log catch on fire?" has a knowable outcome.
"Why did this body begin producing cancerous cells?" has a knowable outcome.
Sometimes the answer to these questions of "why" are satisfying, because the answer is discreet, and leads to solutions, or to new possibilities.
When we asked "why is uranium warm" the answers brought us opportunities.
But as with all things, "why" doesn't always result in a useful answer, or a humanly satisfying one.
All the evidence we have about the origin of life suggests that life exists because a chemical process happened to make something that made more of itself, and this process repeated and became more complex over time. That's all.
When you ask "why does life exist" you're asking for meaning, but you're misunderstanding your own question, you don't understand what "why" means. It's not a question that exists to satisfy your need for that meaning, it's just a cudgel you're wielding because you want to feel important, rather than a tool to extract what IS, and when the answer doesn't tickle your human sense of self-importance, you impotently defend it as if a greater sense of meaning in the answer to your "why" question must exist, that, "that's not what I mean".
What you're really asking isn't, "Why does life exist", what you're asking is "Why is life important."
That question may not have a discreet answer, it may be subjective, or it may have an answer you don't like, and so you have missed the point of what "why" has value in asking.
