Death. I'm not so sure. It's a point I've made before, but I can't have been the first to consider it. To be dead, by definition, is to be dead forever. For all infinite time. In that case, it follows logically that there is no sufficient finite length of time during which signs of life have ceased that would entail death. There is always the logical possibility of resuscitation, or reconstitution (I won't say 'resurrection').
Moral choice. Nothing would make any sense if there weren't at least some real moral choices to be made, real opportunities to feel regret or shame for one's wrong decisions. Well, I don't know. Maybe nothing makes sense. I do what I do, I do what happens. Sometimes, in certain moods, one feels this way. That would be shocking if it were true. If feeling is anything to go by, it can't be true. But feeling (Day 1) is only an indicator of truth, at best, not the ultimate criterion.
My existence. That's difficult to deny, but we've been here before. I exist now, in the present, that's a certainty. But did I exist five seconds ago? My memory tells me I did but my memory might be lying and there's no way to check if you don't trust your memory. And if by 'my existence' I mean the existence of my subjective world then according to Naive Metaphysics it necessarily exists only in the present moment. The I is really the I-now. That's not much, but at least it's something to be certain of, isn't it?
Nothing follows from the existence of I-now. A certainty from which nothing follows is no use or value at all. 'A nothing would serve as well as a something about which nothing can be said.'
The Question. Ah, yes.
This is about the very idea of a 'starting point', a question which is no ordinary question but which dashes itself against the harder-than-diamond face of the real (Day 11) Reminds me of the 'bare question mark' I wrote about back in 1980, 'Beginning with nothing' (Tentative Answers: Proofs in metaphysics). Have I come full circle?