It was something like what happens in mathematics, when thinking to solve an equation, we find we are working on an identity. The line of reasoning is correct, but results in the answer that a equals a , or x equals x , or 0 equals 0. The same thing happened with my reasoning in relation to the question of the meaning of my life. The replies given by all science to that question only result in⁠—identity.

And really, strictly scientific knowledge⁠—that knowledge which begins, as Descartes’s did, with complete doubt about everything⁠—rejects all knowledge admitted on faith and builds everything afresh on the laws of reason and experience, and cannot give any other reply to the question of life than that which I obtained: an indefinite reply. Only at first had it seemed to me that knowledge had given a positive reply⁠—the reply of Schopenhauer: that life has no meaning and is an evil. But on examining the matter I understood that the reply is not positive, it was only my feeling that so expressed it. Strictly expressed, as it is by the Brahmins and by Solomon and Schopenhauer, the reply is merely indefinite, or an identity: 0 equals 0, life is nothing. So that philosophic knowledge denies nothing, but only replies that the question cannot be solved by it⁠—that for it the solution remains indefinite.