@
patrown: I can explain the verse vs. Nigma, or at least what I tried to do, if you want.
If you're interested; It's more a verse about self realization on the deepest level possible than love tbh. Immanuel Kant believe we're born in pain and goes through our lives trying to escape the pain rather than enjoying life. Happiness is a myth; it's nothing but the pain we try to escape from and different levels of it. He also had theories about several dimensions and layers ontop of eachother, basicly; how can you tell that you're not sitting inside of a table right now in a different dimension that overlaps ours? There's more to it, but I'd advice you to read up on the dude instead. But it should give you a clearer image about the main character and why he's conflicted with this girl and her points.
The intro in my piece tells you about how the brain works when it comes to the emotional parts of problem solving. I tried to depict the picture for the battle as an image of his mind, and that the subconscious is a beast in the center of it all while everything else plays out around it before it's given to our senses. ''The subconscious a beast; its eye never sleeps, it's consuming thoughts while being responsible for your personal feats.'''
But we're always analyzing situations and whatnot, so I thought the chessboard-symbolism could work well as a metaphore since there's always a counter-part that will do something either for the better or the worse wether it comes from within or not (or something that plays a part in this emotional puzzle we call a situation between friends/loved ones/whatever). Either way; he experienced what has happened with a lot of people that have studied Immanuel Kant and philosophy in general, Mike got hit by depression, and Mike got hit by it hard as well. It doesn't really matter who the friend is who came to help, it could be a classmate/whatever, it doesn't really play a huge role in this at all.
The girl barely plays a bigger role, heck, none of the characters plays a significant role as what I tried to explain was how the subconscious mind works as opposed to what's given to our senses, and the difference between that and rational actions. The characters in my verse is merely puppets of themselves, or sides of me as a write if you want. And so are we all, enslaved to our own subconscious and how it paints the reality infront of us. And that's why my verse ends like that; What's right/what's wrong doesn't matter, how can we never be happy or ''escaping pain'' if our subconscious defies a certain thought? Philosophy is just ideas that fuck with us and figuring shit out on our own gives a lot more in return than reading up on all of these fuckers. <-- Basicly the conclusion of my verse is that negative thinking doesn't resolve anything, the subconscious and emotions plays a bigger part than knowledge. Therefore Kant was wrong or something.
Either way, I didn't manage to tie it together well and I probably went WAY above my skill-level to try to write something like this. As @
dead man also said, I have only read about Kant and discussed him verbally with friends (in Norwegian so my knowledge about him is limited as well, but I enjoyed what me and my friends have discussed so far and what I've read and thought it would fit to the piece I was writing.), I had no idea how ''Kant'' would rhyme in english so I checked rhymezone.com, which I often do with words I'm uncertain about the pronounciation of and it showed me words like plant etc. so I went with that. Thanks for pointing it out. :)
Also; thanks to those that voted on the battle, I got a lot of feedback to think about, and that's dope af.