It seems to be a circular conundrum
that words are needed for thoughts
which beget feelings, and feelings
are needed for emotions, which
are expressed by words for them to
then become thoughts, and without
thoughts, feelings are meaningless
and there are no need for words for such
meaninglessness in life.

Except that feelings might have
begat the need for words to express
emotion in ways more than just action,
which then led to thinking,
and therefore feelings invented words,
which clearly caused thought, which then
adds meaning to what otherwise
might be the meaninglessness of life.

So then, is it the poet who is
full of words which come from feelings,
but are different from, but the same
as thoughts causing confusion or
rather the fusion of thoughts and
feelings into a commitment to
to the meaningfulness of life?

… and by now you might be thinking
the poet is quite full of something else!