Who is the most important thinker inspired by stirner?

Can someone elaborate on how Stirner influenced Marx? I know Marx got immensely butthurt because of Max, but I don't see how he really influenced him.

its a random shitpost.
you can actually put together random 9 pics

He moved Marx away from utopian socialism.

how did he do that?

I thought Stirner was a meme.

Nowhere else on the internet fangirls him as much as Veeky Forums.

Can someone tell me how I get started with him: what to read before I read his stuff, and which of his works to begin with?

To fully get this concept across, it's not really time that is the spook, but the concept of it. The concept of time brings with it (unless it's some non-western to me unfamiliar concept of time, we just stick to the elementary school stuff, not going blah blah physics because I don't know enough about that to give lectures about time) the concept of order, as in an order to events: Cause -> Effect {and complex ripplings of this fundamental}.
To cut it short, lunch break is almost over, if my thoughts are mine and someone in the past somehow also had these thoughts, or partial, doesn't mean they are not mine. Now to get to it, who am I but my own, but even more my ego which are basically my thoughts and nervous system. So when I have "the thought" I am that thought and it's mine, in that instance I and "further back in time {or forward}" are the same except it's mine. If that other person went of to think other thoughts (aka had an other effect) he wouldn't be mine anymore than I was ever his.
The time spook is basically, if you work it out more, the OP(ost) {not poster}:
>inspired by stirner?
should be
>that was and/or will be mine?

He wasn't as much of an influence as the memes would have you believe but Marx avoided moral arguments for his ideology thanks to Stirner in a way, instead of calling capitalism "le ebil system" it was reformulated to imply that overthrowing it would be in the self interest of the worker

Stirner was an absolute brainlet and modern sociobiology/neuroscience proves him wrong.

Stirnerites are will die alone.
inb4 muh spooks

He only wrote one work, genius.

Aside from Marx figures like Benjamin Tucker and the US individualists.

From Stirner's criticism Marx moved towards grounding his theories more heavily in dialectical and historical materialism and further away from humanism. Whilst its arguable he might have come across this by himself eventually Stirner sped it up.

>Can someone tell me how I get started with him

His only book "the ego and its own" followed by his essay "Stirner's Critics".

I

>modern sociobiology/neuroscience proves him wrong.
How so?

>tfw user died before he could finish his post

What you desire is controlled by your biological instincts.
So what your "ego" wants to do is a "spook" itself.

Anyway Stirner reads like an edgy atheist fedora 12 year old that just discovered organization religion is bullshit and obnoxiously tells everyone this as if he's discovered something brilliant.

Press F

>What you desire is controlled by your biological instincts.So what your "ego" wants to do is a "spook" itself.

Spooks are things you place above your interests as an individual - it doesnt matter what the origins of these interests are. Fulfilling biological instincts rather than suppressing them due to ideological constructs is in perfect harmony with his thought.

>Anyway Stirner reads like an edgy atheist fedora
Actually Stirner is more about pointing out the hypocrisy of edgelord athiests.

>what was taken from God has been superadded to Man, and the power of humanity grew greater in just the degree that of piety lost weight: “Man” is the God of today, and fear of Man has taken the place of the old fear of God.

>But, because Man represents only another Supreme Being, nothing in fact has taken place but a metamorphosis in the Supreme Being, and the fear of Man is merely an altered form of the fear of God.

>Our atheists are pious people.

you havent read stirner or are a complete brainlet

>Spooks are things you place above your interests as an individual
>Fulfilling biological instincts rather than suppressing them due to ideological constructs is in perfect harmony with his thought.
So you admit the BIOLOGICAL EMPATHY you feel for other people is valid, when when ideology tells you not to feel empathy?

also btw stirnerism is an ideology just like any other

>Actually Stirner is more about pointing out the hypocrisy of edgelord athiests.
The irony, Stirner WAS an edgylord fedora faggot.

wow look at this faggot with no argument

Brainlet

Stirner was never against empathy

>no argument
>calls others brainlet

>So you admit the BIOLOGICAL EMPATHY you feel for other people is valid, when when ideology tells you not to feel empathy?
The egoism of Stirner doesnt tell you not to feel empathy only to embrace your own interests - which guess what includes empathy.

>I love men too — not merely individuals, but every one. But I love them with the consciousness of egoism; I love them because love makes me happy, I love because loving is natural to me, because it pleases me. I know no “commandment of love.” I have a fellow-feeling with every feeling being, and their torment torments, their refreshment refreshes me too;

>also btw stirnerism is an ideology just like any other
Ideology is only an issue from his point of view when you place it above your own interests. Its not an inherently negative thing.

>The irony, Stirner WAS an edgylord fedora faggot.
He was actually fairly tame by all accounts. His book came out of nowhere and caused a lot of his peers to reassess their viewpoints.

yes he was

>The egoism of Stirner doesnt tell you not to feel empathy only to embrace your own interests - which guess what includes empathy.
People who don't have empathy have fucked up genetics and should be segregated from the population.
Caring about your community should be part of your rational self interest anyway.

>He was actually fairly tame by all accounts. His book came out of nowhere and caused a lot of his peers to reassess their viewpoints.
So?
He still sounded like an edgy fedorafaggot.
Calling others your "property" when you're some fucking faggot is edgy fedora as fuck.

>hurr durr fedora hurr edgy
Here, have a (you) out of pity, you're clearly just baiting

>People who don't have empathy have fucked up genetics and should be segregated from the population.
Again something else that isnt contrary to the egoism of Stirner.
>Caring about your community should be part of your rational self interest anyway.
Of course which is why its not wise to let spooky ideology get in the way of that - you and Stirner are more alike than you think.

>So He still sounded like an edgy fedorafaggot.
Well thats just an opinion which isnt necessarily backed up by reality - also fun fact he could read ancient greek and latin which was part of his studies in theology and the New Testament.

>Calling others your "property" when you're some fucking faggot is edgy fedora as fuck.
All it does is unmask the relationship between the pursuit of your own interests and other people, ideas and things. Unsettling but honest and to the point rather than just something for shock value.

t. fedora neckbeard

>Again something else that isnt contrary to the egoism of Stirner.
I don't understand why egoism has to enter into ANY of this.

>why its not wise to let spooky ideology get in the way of tha
Why do you need stirnerite egoism to tell you that?
Isn't it common fucking sense that some ideologies are fucking retarded?

>you and Stirner are more alike than you think.
Sorry I don't like eating children alive.

>Well thats just an opinion which isnt necessarily backed up by reality
He does exactly what fedoras do though.

>All it does is unmask the relationship between the pursuit of your own interests and other people, ideas and things.
All he had to say what morals aren't objectively real.
Everyone already knew this.

All of this german philosophy like stirner, marx and hegel are fucking cancer.

read his book, if you can avoid an English translation, it's fucking awful

>ego instead of individual
>spooks instead of spirits

>I don't understand why egoism has to enter into ANY of this.
Because that is the philosophy put forward by Stirner.

>Why do you need stirnerite egoism to tell you that? Isn't it common fucking sense that some ideologies are fucking retarded?
Take a look at the recent US election or perhaps the sjw and the progressive movement - common sense is surprisingly uncommon

More seriously because we are conditioned to see acting in genuine self interest as being negative - hence why egotistical and the like is an insult not a compliment and why people confuse their own interests with those of an ideology.

>Sorry I don't like eating children alive.
Neither did he, gosh you are becoming more and more alike by the post!

>He does exactly what fedoras do though.
Write a well cited and targeted books for academic types and otherwise keep his opinions to himself? The fedoras of your country must be different.

>Everyone already knew this.
You would be surprised at what the mindset of the mid 1800s was.

>All of this german philosophy like stirner, marx...
Well as we are seeing here, it looks like you might have been mistaken about Stirner.

>spooks instead of spirits
The German word he used was "spuk"

If it wasn't for his usage of the word spook he wouldn't be as relevant here, the English translations made him easy meme material

>tfw you witness a calm rebuttal

>Because that is the philosophy put forward by Stirner.
Then it's useless.
>Take a look at the recent US election or perhaps the sjw and the progressive movement - common sense is surprisingly uncommon
No shit.
Stirnerism is making this WORSE.
He's actually giving leftist ideologies more power.

>Neither did he
He said if that's what you are INTO then you should just go ahead and do it.
Fuck this guy.
>Write a well cited and targeted books for academic types and otherwise keep his opinions to himself?
His writings are fedora core.
>You would be surprised at what the mindset of the mid 1800s was.
I'm sure people back then knew some ideologies were bullshit.
I mean countless people know this TODAY without stirner.

>Well as we are seeing here, it looks like you might have been mistaken about Stirner.
Stirner is just like those brainlet hegelian delusional idiots.

Why are you so angry my friend, what did the spooks man ever do to you

Who said I was angry?

>Then it's useless.
How so?

>Stirnerism is making this WORSE.
He's actually giving leftist ideologies more power.
The only thing Stirnerism is doing is generating memes and letting a few people live more authentic lives. Leftism would cease to be leftism is his thought abounded.

>He said if that's what you are INTO then you should just go ahead and do it.
Where? His philosophy is about acting in ones best interest, not just doing whatever you are into as if you did not live in community/society.

>His writings are fedora core.
Not at all, unlike the trinity of Fedoraism - Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris his writings are not polemics that misrepresent their opponents, or rely on strawmen.

>I'm sure people back then knew some ideologies were bullshit.
See the trouble is and what Stirner pointed out (in that quote I shared with you) is the fact that when people think they are getting rid of the bullshit they are simply just reddressing and shaping it.

>Stirner is just like those brainlet hegelian delusional idiots.
How so?

Its getting late, if the thread is still alive tomorrow Ill happily respond to any other issues with Max the meme man.

Also pic extremely related.

>How so?
similar theories without the autism and child murder acceptance have already been accepted
>more authentic lives.
How are they more authentic?
They think capitalism is an "ideology" when it's just the natural voluntary interaction of humans.
It's making them socialists.

>His philosophy is about acting in ones best interest, not just doing whatever you are into as if you did not live in community/society.
What if you get off to killing children?
Stirner would say go ahead and do it.
Stirner would say society judging you for this is a spook and you shouldn't feel any remorse.

>Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris
The Marx, hegel and stirner of their day.

>See the trouble is and what Stirner pointed out (in that quote I shared with you) is the fact that when people think they are getting rid of the bullshit they are simply just reddressing and shaping it.
Show some examples of this.

>How so?
He was part of young hegelians for one.
Secondly he wrote about workers rights, which is basically a spook.
Stirnerfaggots can simply be ignored. Chances are they are leftists claiming economic freedom is a spook and it's a good thing that the government enslaves you.

Holy sheeeeiiiitt!
People!
I, after reading all his shit {assuming we see a one-o-one going on}, can only conclude that this DUDE it's totally memeducated.

Great pic

Albert Einstein

>biological instincts.

Spook

please leave Veeky Forums

He was not against empathy, and he wasn't against emotions. Neither of those things are what he calls spooks.

bump

>similar theories without the autism and child murder acceptance have already been accepted
Which theories are you referring to and did you not understand the previous comments regarding how Stirner's egoism doesnt mean yay child killing?
>How are they more authentic?
Because they don't mistake ideological concerns as being their own or worse still as being more important than their own. Likewise its a useful tool for identifying hypocrisy.

Also funfact - Stirner provided the first translation of Adams Smith's Wealth of Nations and it was the go to translation for about 120 years

>What if you get off to killing children?
Having a sensation or desire doesn't mean fulfilling that desire is in your interest. In the same way that desiring to eat sugary foods and never exercise is a desire but not necessarily in ones interest. Our social organisation prevents such behavior.

>Stirner would say go ahead and do it.
Not at all, not only because of the above but simply because Stirner's theory is not prescriptive of any behavior. Indeed its one of the reasons why the book was also marketed as the billionaires bible in the US & UK.

>Stirner would say society judging you for this is a spook and you shouldn't feel any remorse.
Not true, a spook is defined by its relationship not it being intangible. If society tried to force itself to be ok with childkilling out of some ideological individualism that would actually be the spooky part.

>The Marx, hegel and stirner of their day.
Well with Stirners case I have shown how, he was completely different in his life/actions and his writings. Do you not accept those points or do you have a special understanding of Harris and Stirner?

>Show some examples of this.
Well to use the quote from my earlier post

>what was taken from God has been superadded to Man, and the power of humanity grew greater in just the degree that of piety lost weight: “Man” is the God of today, and fear of Man has taken the place of the old fear of God.

>But, because Man represents only another Supreme Being, nothing in fact has taken place but a metamorphosis in the Supreme Being, and the fear of Man is merely an altered form of the fear of God.

>Our atheists are pious people.

And another one

>Man is not the individual, but man is a thought, an ideal, to which the individual is related not even as the child to the man, but as a chalk point to a point thought of, or as a — finite creature to the eternal Creator, or, according to modern views, as the specimen to the species. Here then comes to light the glorification of “humanity,” the “eternal, immortal,” for whose glory (in majorem humanitatis gloriam) the individual must devote himself and find his “immortal renown” in having done something for the “spirit of humanity.”

1/2

fpbp

Glad to see some love again for The Ghost Toaster, The Geist Meister (not Hegel), The Specter Deflector, etc. Following that conversation with the 15 y/o who thinks Stirner is into child murder provides me with egoistic delight, since if I hadn't read Stirner I would probably be wasting my life doing drugs instead of getting sober and finding a job.

>He was part of young hegelians for one.
He was their biggest and most enduring critic and flustered Marx so hard he wrote a 200 book on him.

>Secondly he wrote about workers rights, which is basically a spook.
So did Adam Smith and no workers rights are not intrinsically a spook even though they can become one like most things.

If you think he is a Commie, give his book another read. He literally discusses how Communists want to steal individual identity from people as much as their property and reduce people to ragamuffins.

>Before the supreme ruler, the sole commander, we had all become equal, equal persons, i. e., nullities.

>Before the supreme proprietor we all become equal — ragamuffins. For the present, one is still in another’s estimation a “ragamuffin,” a “have-nothing”; but then this estimation ceases. We are all ragamuffins together, and as the aggregate of Communistic society we might call ourselves a “ragamuffin crew.”

>When the proletarian shall really have founded his purposed “society” in which the interval between rich and poor is to be removed, then he will be a ragamuffin, for then he will feel that it amounts to something to be a ragamuffin, and might lift “Ragamuffin” to be an honourable form of address, just as the Revolution did with the word “Citizen.” Ragamuffin is his ideal; we are all to become ragamuffins.

>This is the second robbery of the “personal” in the interest of “humanity.” Neither command nor property is left to the individual; the State took the former, society the latter.

>Stirnerfaggots can simply be ignored. Chances are they are leftists claiming economic freedom is a spook and it's a good thing that the government enslaves you.

All Stirner asks you is "why do you do what you do?"

2/2

was gonna post this

Once you truly understand Stirner you realize everyone is already perfectly egoist and they don't even know it, I know this because I haven't read stirner.

None of those people ever read a single page of Stirner. But the most important thinker on that list is Wittgenstein.

>that subtle dig at the German Ideology
Love it

>he hasnt read wittgensteins culture book

That shitposter who broke lit for a week

>Caring about your community should be part of your rational self interest anyway.
People with dark triad traits - machiavellianism, narcisism and psychopathy - do particularly well in society. A lack of empathy seems to be advantageous to the individual

What does fedora even means to you?

>That guy who actually read and as far as I can judge understand the stuff he talks (and not even sperges) about.

>biological instincts are a spook
LOL
You people are legitimate fucking cultists.
When will this "blank slate" pseudointellectual idea just die?
kys

This thread proves stirnerfags are just edgy fedora wearing children that think they just discovered something that nobody else already knows.

>Puts some vague notion of "biological instincts" above his own self interest
Yeah, you're spooked all right

I'm not prescribing you put anything above your self interests.
I'm just DESCRIBING what you WILL do, based on your evolutionary instincts.
Being a pure egoist is impossible.

Also
>biological instincts
>vague
This only proves stirnerfags along with leftists deny evolution and science.
Embarrassing.

Marx BTFO stirner and thought his philosophy was retarded

Marx believed in dialectical materialism.
It's safe to say he was an absolutely retarded pseudointellectual and so are his modern followers.
I mean imagine actually being greasy enough to be a marxist.

Stirnerism is a cult.

place his formulations among the young hegelians of his day and realize he was the best of the bunch.

They were all retarded and if all of them and Hegel too never existed, the world world be a much better, more prosperous place.

Dichamp did, if you're autistic enough you can probably find the register of his checkout somewhere in France.

I love how you can smell retarded utilitarian anglos even through the internet. Their autism stinks worse than opossums.

Marx is an important thinker in the same way the Hitler is an important politician. Don't @ me

The Communist Manifesto would have literally never been written if it weren't for Stirner

>You MUST bow to your instincts! It's impossible not to
Ascetics would like a word with you

How do you get ‘Ego’ out of Einzige?

>is a spook itself

needs are spooks, only desires aren't spooks.

stirner fully acknowledge how simple egoism is, your material mind desire a compensation and need an exterior object

that's pretty much the whole point of neurological research.

This stupid board, everyone knows it's me.

we are not saying you must, we are saying you are.

you are just constructing a way of accessing validation and pleasure that is adequate in society because you believe that the pleasure you derive from certain act is better than the pleasure you derive from other acts and that is simply an ideology, a principle that rule over you.

stirner doesn't say that who rule matter(the individual or the idea) but the fact is that you can't prove that the rule of one or another is superior because from a materialistic point of view, pleasure is pleasure, it's not a construct, it's a function you cannot avoid fulfilling, you are not living to feel pleasure, you exist trough feeling pleasure, so why not exist in your fully?

why not finding which could pleasure you the most if you had no moral fear?
what is your ultimate goal? it surely isn't killing children atm... BUT if the ultimate goal of someone was to kill childrens then yes stirner would advocate it but the fact is that not a lot of peoples derive the highest pleasure and achievement trough killing childs

Check out - these deal touch on these concerns you have with his philosophy.

Anyone who unironically says Marx's analysis was "dialectical materialism" has never read him and is spouting bullshit on something he has no idea about. Read Saint Max in the German Ideology, he rips apart Stirner.

What are Marx”s main criticisms?

Marx didn't understand Stirner. In the preface to "Sankt Max" this is all too evident. Sorry, Karl was an autist who couldn't stand the idea of someone else being right

You don't, it's a shitty translation

>He believed in X
>So he is a retard, but don't mind me not providing any arguments against X or even defining what it means in the first place
Reminder that this is the pseud recipe for low effort discussion when you don't know what you're talking about

>yes he was
no he wasn't, quite the opposite actually
he argues A LOT in the book for "real empathy", the kind you feel towards others because, well, you're human
what he argues against is feeling that you have an obligation to have empathy towards someone (that you don't actually have) because of a social construct
for instance,
feeling empathy towards your mother because you like the person she is - good
feeling obligated to have empathy towards her because "she is my mother and I am supposed to" - bad

you are arguing quite a lot against "Stirner", but pretty much everything you say about him is not what his ideas are at all
go read his book instead of jumping to conclusions after a wikipedia article or just accept that you are clueless about what you are talking and stfu, ty

Can you answer ?

spooky mcspookface

Reminder that Max Stirner didn't even exist, he was Engel's Tyler Durden.

>Nowhere else on the internet fangirls him as much as Veeky Forums.
There are a ton of lefty anarchists which love him.
Don't ever search for egoists on twitter. Their lot is mentally unhinged.

marcel duchamp

modern sociobiology/neuroscience is a
crock of shit

Lmao u spooked

nowhere, unless you'r from the usa.

Aside from Marx how did he influence anyone in the op pic

didn't nietzsche plagiarize stuff from him

The 15yo getting owned was the highlight of my day. I love you guys.