Among the new crop of TV shows (new at the time I gave this speech to post graduates at Florida State University 20-years ago) debuting this fall is one called, Lost. On Lost, blindfolded contestants are dropped into the middle of nowhere and must find their way back home. Once they are dropped and before they can do anything else, every contestant will be forced to ask three questions: 1) Where am I? 2) How do I know? 3) What should I do?

Ironically, programs of this type, which many have dubbed, “Reality TV,” are criticized because they are geared to the intelligence level of a half-wit. The irony lies in the fact that, in this case, Lost concretizes, in the form of a television program, a very abstract intellectual field of study; a field that lies at the foundation of all knowledge. For the questions the contestants on Lost must ask are the very same questions we must ask when we are dropped into existence: 1) Where am I? 2) How do I know? 3) What should I do? The highly abstract intellectual field of study that seeks to provide the answers to those questions is philosophy. It is only through philosophy that we who are dropped into existence can find our way home.

To understand philosophy, let us begin by first defining it; then, we will look at what fields in philosophy those three questions represent.

“Philosophy,” wrote Aristotle, among the greatest philosophers in history, “is the queen of the sciences.” By that he meant that all other fields of study relied upon philosophy. Ayn Rand, the great 20th Century philosopher wrote that “philosophy studies the fundamental nature of existence, of man and of man’s relationship to existence…. [and that] the task of philosophy is to provide man with a comprehensive view of life. This view tells him the nature of the universe (metaphysics); the means by which he is to deal with it, i.e., the means of acquiring knowledge (epistemology); [and] the standards by which he chooses his goals and values in regard to his own life and character (ethics).”

There are two other fields of philosophy, but I will deal with those later. The three fields mentioned—metaphysics, epistemology and ethics—form the foundation of philosophy, with metaphysics and epistemology forming the base of a pyramid on which rests, at the apex, ethics. These three fields represent the three questions everyone must ask themselves before they are can properly function in life; before they can—like the contestants on Lost—find their way home.

Let us now explore the answers one might give to each of those three questions. Fundamentally, i.e., at the most basic level, no matter the complexity of the philosophy, there can be only one of two answers to each of those three questions.

Question 1: “Where am I?” the basic question of metaphysics offers two answers from which to chose: Answer A: we are in an objective, knowable reality that operates independent of the perceiver, a reality where consciousness identifies but does not control existence.

Or answer B: we live in a subjective reality, a reality that is a product of consciousness; a reality where physical laws can be broken by the mere wish of a mind, either our own or someone else’s.

Question 2: “How do I know?” the basic question of epistemology also offers two answers. Answer A is that knowledge is gained through perception and the process of reason, i.e., logic, which, by interpreting the data of our senses, identifies the identity of reality.

Answer B is that knowledge is gained through feelings—intuition, revelation, one’s gut, etc.—either one’s own or those of others.

Finally, Question 3: “What should I do?” the basic question of ethics offers two alternatives as well. Answer A states that right is pursuing and cherishing the values that promote and preserve our lives as rational beings—that one’s life as a rational being is the moral standard. Answer B states that we should focus, instead, on others, either to serve them or to rule them, with will or feelings—either our own or those of others—being the moral standard.

How you answer these questions will largely determine the answers you choose in the two remaining fields of philosophy, namely, politics and aesthetics; which deal with, respectively, the nature of both a proper social system and that of art and beauty.

Your answers to those three little questions, therefore, will determine the principles you practice in your life. Philosophy, then—despite what you may have heard—is the most fundamentally practical discipline among all other fields of study.

In conclusion, Philosophy is the queen of the sciences, the most powerful thing on Earth, lying, as it does, at the base of all of man’s knowledge, directing all men’s lives and, therefore, the course of civilizations; yet an understanding of philosophy begins with just three little questions:

1) Where am I?
2) How do I know?
3) What should I do?

The influence of philosophy is unavoidable. Like those in the TV show, Lost, these are questions no one who is dropped into existence can avoid answering—you have no choice. The only choice left open to you is: do you consciously answer those three questions yourself, basing your answers on your own thinking, certain in your judgment; or do you let others answer them for you, and remain a helpless bit of flotsam tossed upon the waves of circumstance and association?

The choice you make will determine the course of your life.

So choose wisely.

X marks the spot. "You are Here".

1. I am in the place I stand

2.because I'm freaking standing there

3. Just stand.

1) Where am I?
in my living room > south coast of the United States > state of Mississippi > North American continent > American hemisphere > planet Earth > third planet from the star Sol > Solar heliosphere > Orion galactic arm > Milky Way galaxy > local galactic group > Virgo galactic supercluster > Virgo galactic supercluster local group > Virgo supergalactic cluster thread > Universe.

2) How do I know?
Measurement/Calculation/Observation

3) What should I do?
Exist/Die/Decompose

1. The true I is spirit, which has neither location nor temporality. Most of the time, my conscious awareness is tethered to a corporeal body of organisms which I call my earthly temple. This body appears to have location within the material Manifest, and we measure it so; but in the higher truth space and time are not really things that have existence in and of themselves, rather they are the effects of something: the wave is not the water, it is what the water does.

2. No one knows perfectly. Perhaps I know not even in part. What appears true and logical to me may seem rubbish and folly to thee. That is not to say that truth is subjective, as many have today fallen into the error of believing. There is an absolute objective truth to everything, and all competing ideas are, by definition, falsehoods. This statement is one of the very few things that we can know perfectly, and it is the foundational premise upon which we can begin to build a monument of logic based knowledge. We can be certain that this statement is true, because it is necessarily true; for if it were untrue then nothing would exist anywhere because existence itself would be a paradox.

3. Love. We were created for love. Love created the cosmos.

I find your reply interesting. Its very close to how I would have replied 15 years ago. I was very spiritual in how I existed. Then, I died (for a few minutes).
Since then, I focus on the reality and let the spiritual take care of itself.
In doing so, my fears and doubt about my existence faded away. I now have control of my life and realize many of the things which used to bother me, no longer do.
I'm not saying a spiritual outlook is all bad but there needs to be a balance. Living in reality, in the moment is just as important to existence as feeling alive and together it gives existing significance.

Tom, that is curious. One would expect an event like that to have the opposite effect.

As for me, I used to be more materially minded, but watching the decline of civilized society and the rise of tyrannical technocracy, and experiencing the disappointments and sufferings of life have driven me much more into the spiritual. I find that the fears and doubts you spoke of are in the material, so I let God take care of that for me. I’m glad you have found a sense of peace in your balance, but I never could.

It is a little funny to me though that you thought I was saying something spiritual. I felt that I was saying something very balanced, being in part spiritual and in part philosophical and in part physical.

Ya know, at first I did but it left me unsatisfied and confused.
It wasn't till I looked at the material/reality of what happened and put away my metaphysical reaction that I found balance.

All my life my head was filled with concepts based on other people's experiences and their delusions. I decided to try to remove the delusions from my thinking and focus on the reality of existing. As the delusional fortress I created crumbled away, life got easier to handle.
I no longer tried to make life match my expectations but instead, looked at things as they are in reality. Taking away my expectations of life allowed me to make wiser decisions and in doing so, I gained control of my 'out of control' life. I was able to find the conmtentment which had eluded me all my life.

With contentment as my baseline, I am in more control of my emotional states. I no longer hold onto fear or anger. I allow happiness and joy to peak and subside naturally. I don't need to be happy all the time and I no longer seek to be happy all the time in an existence where happiness is a fluctuating state of mind.


Spiritual is a poor word choice on my part. My bad. I was referring to the metaphysical states of mind.

I once got into a heated disciussion on another forum concerning science vs spiritual. During the discussion research I realized science is not separate from spiritual and both have meaning. Both compliment each other. One can't exist without the other.
The physical/metaphysical bond is balance. The human capacity is both.

I often see people who focus on one or the other and will argue and fight to keep them separate. It puts them out of balance. It 'jades' their view of existence. I've found one must embrace both to find inner contentment. I've also found there must be a separation of equality as well.
"Give unto the metaphysical what is metaphysical and unto the physical what is physical".

Wise. “Fake it ‘til you make it” does not work well with emotions. I have seen people try to force themselves to only feel “positive” emotions. They invalidate the “negative” emotions in this way, suppressing what needs to be examined and understood. I think they are heading for a crisis.

A)Where am I ? I am in the comfort zone.

B)How do I know ? I know this because I am not changing.

C)What should I do ? I should leave comfort and embrace change, as closely as possible.

All D best !