Why do liberals insist that hitler did something wrong? Seems like a pretty big spook to me?

Sorta yes. Guarantee if it didn't have such a silly name (and if there wasn't a very famous easily exploitable doodle of him) he wouldn't be as ubiquitous here.

I would assume that it lets them dismiss all things that they don't have concrete evidence for while maintaining an air of intellectuality, without admitting that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Newfriend here what's a spook?

>Actual students of philosophy
Yeah, but they're so retarded they chose to study philosophy.

>I would assume that it lets them dismiss all things that they don't have concrete evidence for while maintaining an air of intellectuality, without admitting that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Calling something a spook is supposed to dispel this type of argumentation, though.

I kind of agree with the stirner I've read (never a full book though) up to a point. Yes, spooks, which are ideologies or ideas you allow to hold power over you, are null in the jungle. In a world of non sentient beings, power is the law.

However, does stirner ever mention things like mutual benefit? It benefits one to be "ethical", to not steal from your neighbor or rape his daughter because of retaliation. Is this sort of ethical thinking taken to an abstract, ie, a modern society with law, still a spook? Is it a spook fundamentally, or just because it's abstracted?

"With ghosts we arrive in the spirit-realm, in the realm of essences.

What haunts the universe, and has its occult, “incomprehensible” being there, is precisely the mysterious spook that we call highest essence. And to get to the bottom of this spook, to comprehend it, to discover reality in it (to prove “the existence of God”) — this task men set to themselves for thousands of years; with the horrible impossibility, the endless Danaid-labor, of transforming the spook into a non-spook, the unreal into something real, the spirit into an entire and corporeal person — with this they tormented themselves to death. Behind the existing world they sought the “thing in itself,” the essence; behind the thing they sought the un-thing."

-Stirner

On this board, usually "something I don't like but I have no real argument to oppose"

He's oldfag user incarnate. Neo Veeky Forums hates him for the same reasons they hate old Veeky Forums.

>However, does stirner ever mention things like mutual benefit? It benefits one to be "ethical", to not steal from your neighbor or rape his daughter because of retaliation. Is this sort of ethical thinking taken to an abstract, ie, a modern society with law, still a spook? Is it a spook fundamentally, or just because it's abstracted?
This is why he wrote Stirner's Critics. He didn't say you should revolt against things because they're spooks. He said he didn't hold those things sacred because they were merely spooks, and more than willing to violate taboos when it suited him.

By students I mean academia in general too. You know, people who get paid to actually study it

It isn't so much of dismissing the existence but dismissing the act of doing something based on that idea that might not exist

Read striner

>studying a fake science
Why?

>people unironically think stirnerposting is a Veeky Forums meme

Absolutely disgusting.

there are no morals, slavery, colonialism, imperialism, none of it was wrong, but neither were slave rebellions and resistance to oppression, also most of what you believe including your most heartfelt beliefs are just spooks