How do I follow his philosophy? Only do things that make me happy because I want to do them?

How do I follow his philosophy? Only do things that make me happy because I want to do them?

Yes, and don't neglect to do something if you can do it without serious repercussions just cuz muh morals.

If you can cheat on your gf and easily get away with it, there's no reason not to except spooks.

What if I wouldn't want to cheat on my girlfriend?

you wouldn't want to ruin that user's worldviews. now go cheat on her.

>following the philosophy if St. Max

>his philosophy
Spooked already I see.

your girlfriend is a spook
cheating is a spook as you cannot cheat on a spook
you not wanting to is a spook
not doing it is a spook

Was doing it with maxes mom a spook?

max's mom was merely a spook herself all along

I would suggest constant introspection and self-evaluation. You want to be aware of what you believe and why you believe it. Any belief you hold dear should be held as such because it somehow benefits you, or makes you greater for its presence.

>If you can cheat on your gf and easily get away with it, there's no reason not to except spooks.

You, unless not betraying your girlfriends trust out of basic human empathy is more important than getting your dick wet. Or because you value your own conception of yourself as a loyal mate.

I'm not sure why moralists seem to have a hard time with this concept: you can value whatever you want under Stirner's views.

>his philosophy
You've already lost.
If you're asking how you my slave are to follow my philosophy, then I will tell you that you are not me and thus can do nothing about it.

Ask yourself why you don't.

I think you guys are only so into this guy because the word spooks is funny and you like his little drawings.

Whenever I see Veeky Forums or Veeky Forums saying muh spooks I always giggle because it reminds me of niggers

I think he's an absolutely fantastic philosopher and detest that he's become a meme.

>betraying your girlfriends trust
>value your own conception of yourself
youre doing mental gymnastics around what is morally wrong

Stirner is literally a spook. His very essence is communicated through that caricature, through which he inevitably possesses all who gaze upon it.

>what is morally wrong

Inherently morally wrong? Don't make me laugh. Whether the person chooses to cheat or not to cheat under this system is all a matter of what they value. I'm simply pointing out that the previous poster's view is myopic and short-sighted, at best. Stirner outright states that social behaviour and personal limitations are vital to the pursuit of self-interest, fidelity is entirely fitting, provided you don't consider it an absolute ought.

Because it would be a meaningless experience and likely to damage my emotional connection to my gf.

People who want multiple sexual partners are usually spooked.

...

I'd argue that's more Rand territory (i.e. Happiness being an end).

The idea is more to find what you can consider to be True self-interest.
It's less philosophy and more method.
Stirner supplies a metric with less assumptions to measure ideas.

>

>le spook shoppe

will it ever end

No happiness being an end is hedonism. Rand's philosophy is more "do what makes you happy HOWEVER". It takes hedonism and adds a bunch of exceptions and rules to it.

>cheating is morally wrong

Humans are not penguins

Reminder that Stirner and his ilk would bring down society
>lol waste this bitch man morality's just a spook
>execute those jews Himmler my boy it's all just a spook
>kek launch those nukes putin your obligation to your people is a spook

Said the virgin

Thats the beauty of it.

It's the Nuke of Philosophy.

Nice projection friend

How's the weather in Virgintown?

What are you, five?

t. virgin

ok?

ye ok virgin

How's school?

Nice trips virgin

I'm going to fuck celebrities desu (also not a virgin)

You realize that the whole concept of "loyal mate" is not something you came up yourself but an actual spook the Christian-influenced society rubbed off on you?

...

>Because it would be a meaningless experience and likely to damage my emotional connection to my gf.
Then obviously cheating on her wouldn't make you happy, so you shouldn't do it.

You do realize that the whole concept of "spooks" is not something you came up yourself but an actual spook the Stirner-influenced imageboard rubbed off on you

So are all values inherently spooks? Or does my awareness that everything is relative to my own wants and perceptions negate their spookiness?

I'm trying to grasp what Stirner's endgame was, besides dismantling Heigel and his kin. I know we can't truly project what he thought in moderntimes, only barebones, but like, what exactly did he intend to convey with the idea of spooks to begin with? Surely he and Diogenes (the two seem to invoke similar usage recently desu) possess merit beyond meme worthy reactions to popular philosophy.

>How do I follow his philosophy?

Why would you want to? Just because he's a meme on Veeky Forums?

*Hegel, fucking hell

>does my awareness that everything is relative to my own wants and perceptions negate their spookiness?
Yes.
Values themselves aren't spooks. It's your way of dealing with them that makes them such.

Maybe, but the fact someone else came up with it doesn't mean I can't hold it dear. I really sincerely wish the people here would actually read The Ego and Its Own. You're free to value whatever you see fit, and maintaining a stable, monogamous relationship has benefits. The key here would be whether you'd seek to preserve this relationship when it did indeed no longer benefit you (say, after you've found yourself in an abusive relationship, as an example).

The objective isn't to become Guru Autismo, the spookless man. Engaging in such a bizarre form of dogmatism would be hilariously contradictory.

What would Stirner say about suicide?