@jufa,
Why are the other commenters so mad?
Also, good post Jufa. My first read on this platform. I think you were pointing out to the limits of cognition which others misunderstood, maybe they got triggered by the title or they have some personal quarrels with you, I don't know.
Indeed, there's nothing to learn about yourself as individual, that would be pointless, too narrow. To learn about oneself, one first starts with the examination of what is the 'self' one has endlessly philosophized on, or hasn't.
This does not happen in the field of mere knowledge. It has to become experiential. It has been repeatedly said over and over by various philosophers that knowledge without emotion is sterile.
So, sitting down quietly, doing nothing, things start to appear. What is noticed under observation? Well, only duality of "me and my thoughts and feelings" if one is still identified with one's self-image. This is the "absurd non-definitve insanity" you were talking about?
Sure our definitions, labels, and such give us security. Being an atheist, or some certain kind of philosopher, gives you an ego boost. And the "will to life", the blind force in each one us, "the conatus", loves that! To have that increase of power. No questions asked. And the cycle of emotional rollercoaster continues, being wholly identified with one's ups and downs. We are so easily satisfied.
And knowing human psychology, you can't even talk about "otherness" since it only causes an chaser effect.
"Via negativa", or negation, seems to be appropriate approach. It's like Zen, an unloading process. Not accumulating more.
Also, if you ever come to find a person who's been on the quest for longer time, you'll come to find that everything is much more simplified. No special knowledge, no complexity. But very basic things: Observation without evaluation.