Our most impish nature...

“The mind is the result of the torments the flesh undergoes or inflicts upon itself.”
-EM Cioran

It has become a custom for me to simultaneously contradict and defend the words of Nietzsche and Cioran. On one hand their Nihilism touches home, on the other I am left wanting an optimistic angle. These two characters provide neither comfort nor the necessary illusion that fathers it. In a sense what is offered from their minds is nothing short of reality, simple and pure.

It follows that the mind is subjected to the desires of flesh, but to what extent does the mind regulate those desires? We know that the mind is a great instrument of control; otherwise we would all fall into the depravity of instinct. Or is it the other way around? Do our instincts keep our mind in check?

The truth is it is much easier to say that the flesh must be controlled by the mind. Our laws and morals are built around this principle. From a biological sense we can prove the converse, but this is about as far as we can go.

It would, perhaps be easier to discuss this topic, if I allow the topic to be known.

What I wish to ponder in this moment is the concept of ‘Love’. Yes, the bane and source of all art, of all faith, of all hope. In the basest sense, we can bring love back to biology, thus offering a proof of the notion that the flesh creates the mind through abuse of self. There are profound physiological effects generated by ‘Love’. Are these the ‘torments’ that craft out thoughts?

If that is the case, then medication is in order.

What if we find another view? Perhaps ‘Love’ is a construct of the mind as a justification for our most carnal urges. ‘Love’ becomes remarkably less enticing because we know as a consequence that we are only feeding an instinctual desire.

This could be a profound revelation if it were true. For my part, I don’t want to view even the most painful ‘Love’ as a base animal desire. I wish to step into the delusion and stay there forever. Then again, that is the nature of justification.

So, now the problem of ‘Love’ is even greater than before. Mainly because we can never know it’s true nature, not because it is complex, but because it maybe so simple that we refuse to see it. The dilemma is not one of definition, but rather one of dishonesty. Except now, we are at once the liars and the ones lied to. It stands to reason that the only solution is the kill that which as put us here.

This is why I must brutalize ‘Love’ as an independent concept. Otherwise the flesh is to blame. If flesh and ‘Love’ were interdependent, then the only option would be to destroy the flesh, for it is the flesh that has sinned against me.

Thank God there’s no proof in either direction.