2017

Can you plebs just read Stirner? I mean, it's 2017...

why would I do something like that?

...

Anarchism is a spook

Anarchists don't follow majority vote.

ego is a spook
spook is a spook

t. buddha, the true spookbuster

Retard.

Why? You're the one posting untrue and not funny pics.

Aside from the memes, can anybody offer any valid arguments against Stirner? I've read The Ego And Its Own and I actually agree with most of what he says.

It would depend on what your argument would presuppose. Stirner brought Young Hegelian materialism to its logical conclusion, while making fun of dialectics in the process as well.
If you have an entirely different metaphysical view, Stirner would be pretty useless to you.

What do you mean? Stirner never claimed ideas like God or morality don't exist, but that there is no reason to serve them. Everything he says about morality for example could be applied to regular king. The only difference is that the king is material, and thus can harm you.

>Stirner never claimed ideas like God or morality don't exist, but that there is no reason to serve them.
I find that a very poor reading of stirner

Anyway, my argument was that Stirner is mainly arguing both for and against materialism, in the sense that he attacks Feuerbach's and Marx' naive materialism, but takes it further.
If you would, for instance, be a cartesian dualist, Stirner isn't exactly making a direct argument against it. Sure you could use Stirner's work to form one, but that's not directly within the scope of what he wrote.

I believe in truth (though don't believe humans are capable of knowing it fully on earth) I believe in Platonism and think being part of something bigger than yourself gives you meaning and identity.

In short I don't agree with stirner.

>being this spooked
Also not an arguement

Explain how your meme philosophy would actually make society better.

I'm not in the mood to make arguments, just wanted to point out they exist.

Suicide is a spook

I think it has something to do with being so wrapped up in externalities you are unable to self-actualize. Like attaching undue meaning to material objects and being unable to let go of preconceived notions of the way things are "supposed to be".

>think being part of something bigger than yourself gives you meaning and identity.
So are you making yourself part of a bigger cause out of your own self interest or do you actually believe there is something greater above yourself you need to serve? If it's the former, you're not that spooked.

>society
Ayy.

Greater above myself that's in the interest of me and God that I serve.

Not sure if b8 or actually that spooked

>2017
>people STILL say Stirner didn't believe in morality, even though the premise was that spooks make people act more immorally

the self-interest of those scared by the terrible retaliation of starving children and slaughtered non-humans (meanwhile "self-interested" angry warriors actually risk and lose their lives for justice)

if he cared so much for morality he might have explained why shouldn't i increase my physical comfort at the expense of powerless sentients

material comfort without effort is a spook lmao, let empty bellies forced to toil know that

Childhood is about idolizing Stirner, Adulthood is realizing Heidegger makes more sense.

do your platonic ideas send to hell those who refuse to serve them or are they just as powerless as marxian dialectics unable to punish those who put worldly opportunism over sacrifice on behalf of humanity?

has heidegger ever figured out any argument able to discourage a stirnerian from putting his whim (sometimes even self-destructive whims like those laughable imbeciles who sacrificed for the oppressed show us) above the rest of the world?

They only exist. They aren't powerless though, considering they've drove humanity from our beginning and continue to do so.

ego is a spook which is why those who starve and are dismembered by bombs shouldn't be so upset about the fate of such a spook

is greed such a platonic idea? because out there i see greed trampling upon all you cherish with empty churches and activists being laughingstocks

i
>Is greed such a platonic idea?
Yes actually.

mah NAP is invisibly stronger than a majority forcing on the weaker because justice is a magic force

Can you see greed? Can you feel greed? No. Yet you see greed existing. Therefore you yourself accept Platonism, even if you don't know it.

when i see people longing for material comfort i tell them "stick to your hunger and sweat because being able to enjoy what you want without effort is a spook"

hunger is a spook, kropotkinian bread-bakers should have known better

Is this sarcasm or a sincere statement?

I think you misunderstand what a spook is. Wanting to enjoy material effort without working for it is the opposite a spook. Its the needs of the ego.

You who prattle that morality is social and that man would need no morality on a desert island—it is on a desert island that he would need it most. Let him try to claim, when there are no victims to pay for it, that a rock is a house, that sand is clothing, that food will drop into his mouth without cause or effort, that he will collect a harvest tomorrow by devouring his stock seed today—and reality will wipe him out, as he deserves; reality will show him that life is a value to be bought and that thinking is the only coin noble enough to buy it.

it is so comfortable that society makes exploitation of weaker sentients possible so that we don't have to personally extract the coltan for which subsaharan children helpless against imperialism have died in mines

Why do people always break down Stirner to topics of spooks and property?

Isn't that missing Stirner's drift?

what else is there?

by the way an egoist might profit more from the sacrifice of selfless people instrumental to his purposes than by an union of egoists (especially those egoists who don't enslave weaker sentients because chickens might revolt and reverse the relations of power and this is a scary thing threatening our self-interest)

Just read it. He’s pre-capitalist, a figure of the Enlightenment. What we would call capitalism he despised. People read snippets of Adam Smith, the few phrases they teach in school. Everybody reads the first paragraph of The Wealth of Nations where he talks about how wonderful the division of labor is. But not many people get to the point hundreds of pages later, where he says that division of labor will destroy human beings and turn people into creatures as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human being to be. And therefore in any civilized society the government is going to have to take some measures to prevent division of labor from proceeding to its limits.

He did give an argument for markets, but the argument was that under conditions of perfect liberty, markets will lead to perfect equality. That’s the argument for them, because he thought that equality of condition (not just opportunity) is what you should be aiming at. It goes on and on. He gave a devastating critique of what we would call North-South policies. He was talking about England and India. He bitterly condemned the British experiments they were carrying out which were devastating India.

He also made remarks which ought to be truisms about the way states work. He pointed out that its totally senseless to talk about a nation and what we would nowadays call “national interests.” He simply observed in passing, because it’s so obvious, that in England, which is what he’s discussing — and it was the most democratic society of the day — the principal architects of policy are the “merchants and manufacturers,” and they make certain that their own interests are, in his words, “most peculiarly attended to,” no matter what the effect on others, including the people of England who, he argued, suffered from their policies. He didn’t have the data to prove it at the time, but he was probably right.

>He’s pre-capitalist, a figure of the Enlightenment
>Enlightenment
>Enlightenment
October 25, 1806 - June 26, 1856
>Enlightenment

Democracy is a spirit

Sharing the humanist and rationalist outlook of the European Enlightenment of the same time period, the thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment asserted the fundamental importance of human reason combined with a rejection of any authority that could not be justified by reason. They held to an optimistic belief in the ability of humanity to effect changes for the better in society and nature, guided only by reason. This latter feature gave the Scottish Enlightenment its special flavour, distinguishing it from its continental European counterpart. In Scotland, the Enlightenment was characterised by a thoroughgoing empiricism and practicality where the chief values were improvement, virtue, and practical benefit for the individual and society as a whole.

Among the fields that rapidly advanced were philosophy, political economy, engineering, architecture, medicine, geology, archaeology, law, agriculture, chemistry and sociology. Among the Scottish thinkers and scientists of the period were Francis Hutcheson, David Hume, Adam Smith, Dugald Stewart, Thomas Reid, Robert Burns, Adam Ferguson, John Playfair, Joseph Black and James Hutton.

Because you appropriate their suffering. And if you don't and you're a psycho, they wouldn't put up with it anyway because they won't be spooked into helping you.

because children dismembered by bombs or forced to extract our coltan in deadly mines are totally able to retaliate if they weren't manipulated by spooks and it's not like middle-class white men are totally indifferent to the spooks of humanity and justice with no screeching humanist able to prevent their boot from stomping the face of the powerless portions of mankind

it's like with the slaughtered non-human sentients "you have been spooked into believing you have a right to enslave and kill them" as if they were somehow sacred and inviolable (well the suffering we inflict on them for our taste buds to enjoy their flesh shows they aren't inviolable at all)

seems like the "spook" of anthropocentrism and racism allow for unabashed enjoyment of exploitation of other sentients while the unfortunate handicap of empathy cripples the lives of those who are condamned to be wrecked by guilt (those unfortunate enough to be tormented by such a handicap might as well look the other way and enjoy the fruits of exploitation of sentient life, much like one hasn't to look straight into the sun in order to get beautifully tanned)

Stirner was a liberal idealist

>Feuerbach's and Marx' naive materialism

You're not lumping these two together are you? You really have no idea what you're talking about

the less naive of the two is famously the one making objective scientific predictions

>It's another spookposting thread
Stirnerlings are the most cancerous motherfuckers this side of /pol/

why should she be withholding something like that from the group? Selfish.

Subscribing to Stirner's concept of spoils is a spook. To unspook your self you must spook yourself to the fact that you can't unspiok yourself because everything is spioks and nothing is spooks.

Kind of spooky when you think about it.

>68 replies

I respect how you counted your own reply

>You're not lumping these two together are you?
Pre-German Ideology Marx was very much like Feuerbach

That's why you say it at the beginning, explain what a spook is, and then go from there.

They would've done it with or without the vote, because they were willing and stronger than her.

You are all pseudointellectuals.

I'm 19 years old.

I am handsome, smart, athletic and virile.

I have a novel that is in it's final editing stage, and a creative writing professor at my college has read the first draft and thinks it's saleable.

I have a girlfriend who is confident, articulate, playful and spontaneous.

I have a small group of interesting friends from different social and academic backgrounds, and I also have many other acquaintances who see me as a reliable source of humour and good company.

Both my parents are alive and in good health.

I have no regrets.

I have already experienced three existential crises, the latter of which was described as having the depth and profundity of a man twice my age.

I am a passionate lover, a sharp thinker, and a trader of witty repartee.

I am not self-pitying, meek or needlessly humble.

I will live a good life at your expense.

Thread quality is most definitely a spook on Veeky Forums.

Why does the newfag pretending to be an oldfag get so butthurt about Stirner?

Stirner is classic Veeky Forums "I do it for the lulz" philosophy, not this idiotic newfag right wing ideological crusade, where everything they disagree with is evil, that has taken over Veeky Forums in recent years.

the current year is a spook

>They would've done it with or without the vote, because they were willing and stronger than her.

spooks famously make good people evil it's not like it's the other way round