each　man：　　〃What　am　I？〃　or　〃Why　do　I　live？〃　or　〃What　must　I　do？〃
  one　has　first　to　decide　the　question：　〃What　is　the　life　of　the
  whole？〃　（which　is　to　him　unknown　and　of　which　he　is　acquainted　with
  one　tiny　part　in　one　minute　period　of　time。　　To　understand　what　he
  is；　one　man　must　first　understand　all　this　mysterious　humanity；
  consisting　of　people　such　as　himself　who　do　not　understand　one
  another。
  I　have　to　confess　that　there　was　a　time　when　I　believed　this。
  It　was　the　time　when　I　had　my　own　favourite　ideals　justifying　my
  own　caprices；　and　I　was　trying　to　devise　a　theory　which　would　allow
  one　to　consider　my　caprices　as　the　law　of　humanity。　　But　as　soon　as
  the　question　of　life　arose　in　my　soul　in　full　clearness　that　reply
  at　once　few　to　dust。　　And　I　understood　that　as　in　the　experimental
  sciences　there　are　real　sciences；　and　semi…sciences　which　try　to
  give　answers　to　questions　beyond　their　competence；　so　in　this
  sphere　there　is　a　whole　series　of　most　diffused　sciences　which　try
  to　reply　to　irrelevant　questions。　　Semi…sciences　of　that　kind；　the
  juridical　and　the　social…historical；　endeavour　to　solve　the
  questions　of　a　man's　life　by　pretending　to　decide　each　in　its　own
  way；　the　question　of　the　life　of　all　humanity。
  But　as　in　the　sphere　of　man's　experimental　knowledge　one　who
  sincerely　inquires　how　he　is　to　live　cannot　be　satisfied　with　the
  reply　　〃Study　in　endless　space　the　mutations；　infinite　in　time
  and　in　complexity；　of　innumerable　atoms；　and　then　you　will
  understand　your　life〃　　so　also　a　sincere　man　cannot　be　satisfied
  with　the　reply：　〃Study　the　whole　life　of　humanity　of　which　we
  cannot　know　either　the　beginning　or　the　end；　of　which　we　do　not
  even　know　a　small　part；　and　then　you　will　understand　your　own
  life。〃　And　like　the　experimental　semi…sciences；　so　these　other
  semi…sciences　are　the　more　filled　with　obscurities；　inexactitudes；
  stupidities；　and　contradictions；　the　further　they　diverge　from　the
  real　problems。　　The　problem　of　experimental　science　is　the　sequence
  of　cause　and　effect　in　material　phenomena。　　It　is　only　necessary
  for　experimental　science　to　introduce　the　question　of　a　final　cause
  for　it　to　become　nonsensical。　　The　problem　of　abstract　science　is
  the　recognition　of　the　primordial　essence　of　life。　　It　is　only
  necessary　to　introduce　the　investigation　of　consequential　phenomena
  （such　as　social　and　historical　phenomena）　and　it　also　becomes
  nonsensical。
  Experimental　science　only　then　gives　positive　knowledge　and
  displays　the　greatness　of　the　human　mind　when　it　does　not　introduce
  into　its　investigations　the　question　of　an　ultimate　cause。　　And；　on
  the　contrary；　abstract　science　is　only　then　science　and　displays
  the　greatness　of　the　human　mind　when　it　puts　quite　aside　questions
  relating　to　the　consequential　causes　of　phenomena　and　regards　man
  solely　in　relation　to　an　ultimate　cause。　　Such　in　this　realm　of
  science　　forming　the　pole　of　the　sphere　　is　metaphysics　or
  philosophy。　　That　science　states　the　question　clearly：　　〃What　am　I；
  and　what　is　the　universe？　　And　why　do　I　exist；　and　why　does　the
  universe　exist？〃　　And　since　it　has　existed　it　has　always　replied　in
  the　same　way。　　Whether　the　philosopher　calls　the　essence　of　life
  existing　within　me；　and　in　all　that　exists；　by　the　name　of　〃idea〃；
  or　〃substance〃；　or　〃spirit〃；　or　〃will〃；　he　says　one　and　the　same
  thing：　　that　this　essence　exists　and　that　I　am　of　that　same
  essence；　but　why　it　is　he　does　not　know；　and　does　not　say；　if　he　is
  an　exact　thinker。　　I　ask：　　〃Why　should　this　essence　exist？　　What
  results　from　the　fact　that　it　is　and　will　be？〃　。。。　And　philosophy
  not　merely　does　not　reply；　but　is　itself　only　asking　that　question。
  And　if　it　is　real　philosophy　all　its　labour　lies　merely　in　trying
  to　put　that　question　clearly。　　And　if　it　keeps　firmly　to　its　task
  it　cannot　reply　to　the　question　otherwise　than　thus：　　〃What　am　I；
  and　what　is　the　universe？〃　　〃All　and　nothing〃；　and　to　the　question
  〃Why？〃　by　〃I　do　not　know〃。
  So　that　however　I　may　turn　these　replies　of　philosophy；　I　can
  never　obtain　anything　like　an　answer　　and　not　because；　as　in　the
  clear　experimental　sphere；　the　reply　does　not　relate　to　my
  question；　but　because　here；　though　all　the　mental　work　is　directed
  just　to　my　question；　there　is　no　answer；　but　instead　of　an　answer
  one　gets　the　same　question；　only　in　a　complex　form。
  VI
  In　my　search　for　answers　to　life's　questions　I　experienced
  just　what　is　felt　by　a　man　lost　in　a　forest。
  He　reaches　a　glade；　climbs　a　tree；　and　clearly　sees　the
  limitless　distance；　but　sees　that　his　home　is　not　and　cannot　be
  there；　then　he　goes　into　the　dark　wood　and　sees　the　darkness；　but
  there　also　his　home　is　not。
  So　I　wandered　n　that　wood　of　human　knowledge；　amid　the　gleams
  of　mathematical　and　experimental　science　which　showed　me　clear
  horizons　but　in　a　direction　where　there　could　be　no　home；　and　also
  amid　the　darkness　of　the　abstract　sciences　where　I　was　immersed　in
  deeper　gloom　the　further　I　went；　and　where　I　finally　convinced
  myself　that　there　was；　and　could　be；　no　exit。
  Yielding　myself　to　the　bright　side　of　knowledge；　I　understood
  that　I　was　only　diverting　my　gaze　from　the　question。　　However
  alluringly　clear　those　horizons　which　opened　out　before　me　might
  be；　however　alluring　it　might　be　to　immerse　oneself　in　the
  limitless　expanse　of　those　sciences；　I　already　understood　that　the
  clearer　they　were　the　less　they　met　my　need　and　the　less　they
  applied　to　my　question。
  〃I　know；〃　said　I　to　myself；　〃what　science　so　persistently
  tries　to　discover；　and　along　that　road　there　is　no　reply　to　the
  question　as　to　the　meaning　of　my　life。〃　　In　the　abstract　sphere　I
  understood　that　notwithstanding　the　fact；　or　just　because　of　the
  fact；　that　the　direct　aim　of　science　is　to　reply　to　my　question；
  there　is　no　reply　but　that　which　I　have　myself　already　given：
  〃What　is　the　meaning　of　my　life？〃　　〃There　is　none。〃　　Or：　　〃What
  will　come　of　my　life？〃　〃Nothing。〃　　Or：　　〃Why　does　everything　exist
  that　exists；　and　why　do　I　exist？〃　　〃Because　it　exists。〃
  Inquiring　for　one　region　of　human　knowledge；　I　received　an
  innumerable　quantity　of　exact　replies　concerning　matters　about
  which　I　had　not　asked：　　about　the　chemical　constituents　of　the
  stars；　about　the　movement　of　the　sun　towards　the　constellation
  Hercules；　about　the　origin　of　species　and　of　man；　about　the　forms
  of　infinitely　minute　imponderable　particles　of　ether；　but　in　this
  sphere　of　knowledge　the　only　answer　to　my　question；　〃What　is　the
  meaning　of　my　life？〃　was：　〃You　are　what　you　call　your　'life'；　you
  are　a　transitory；　casual　cohesion　of　particles。　　The　mutual
  interactions　and　changes　of　these　particles　produce　in　you　what　you
  call　your　〃life〃。　　That　cohesion　will　last　some　time；　afterwards
  the　interaction　of　these　particles　will　cease　and　what　you　call
  〃life〃　will　cease；　and　so　will　all　your　questions。　　You　are　an
  accidentally　united　little　lump　of　something。　　that　little　lump
  ferments。　　The　little　lump　calls　that　fermenting　its　'life'。　　The
  lump　will　disintegrate　and　there　will　be　an　end　of　the　fermenting
  and　of　all　the　questions。〃　　So　answers　the　clear　side　of　science
  and　cannot　answer　otherwise　if　it　strictly　follows　its　principles。
  From　such　a　reply　one　sees　that　the　reply　does　not　answer　the
  question。　　I　want　to　know　the　meaning　of　my　life；　but　that　it　is　a
  fragment　of　the　infinite；　far　from　giving　it　a　meaning　destroys　its
  every　possible　meaning。　　The　obscure　compromises　which　that　side　of
  experimental　exact　science　makes　with　abstract　science　when　it　says
  that　the　meaning　of　life　consists　in　development　and　in　cooperation
  with　development；　owing　to　their　inexactness　and　obscurity　cannot
  be　considered　as　replies。
  The　other　side　of　science　　the　abstract　side　　when　it
  holds　strictly　to　its　principles；　replying　directly　to　the
  question；　always　replies；　and　in　all　ages　has　replied；　in　one　and
  the　same　way：　　〃The　world　is　something　infinite　and
  incomprehensible　part　of　that　incomprehensible　'all'。〃　　Again　I
  exclude　all　those　compromises　between　abstract　and　experimental
  sciences　which　supply　the　whole　ballast　of　the　semi…sciences　called
  juridical；　political；　and　historical。　In　those　semi…sciences　the
  conception　of　development　and　progress　is　again　wrongly　introduced；
  only　with　this　difference；　that　there　it　was　the　development　of
  everything　while　here　it　is　the　development　of　the　life　of　mankind。
  The　error　is　there　as　before：　development　and　progress　in　infinity
  can　have　no　aim　or　direction；　and；　as　far　as　my　question　is
  concerned；　no　answer　is　given。
  In　truly　abstract　science；　namely　in　genuine　philosophy　　not
  in　that　which　Schopenhauer　calls　〃professorial　philosophy〃　which
  serves　only　to　classify　all　existing　phenomena　in　new　philosophic
  categories　and　to　call　them　by　new　names　　where　the　philosopher
  does　not　lose　sight　of　the　essential　question；　the　repl