Anyone here ever been part of a Union of Egoists? I have been in quite the few. Stirner is entirely correct, once one begins to suffer within the Union and cannot reap the rewards of his property, he has condemned the Union to disrepute and it becomes a party like figure, a sham.
It's amazing that he formed these ideas over 100 years ago.
Something I notice about such Unions is that the moment they begin to have rules or a structure they begin to fall apart. The most conducive Unions are those without rules, they are by definition, true Unions.
How would one break down Academic establishments in order to form their polar opposite, the Union?
Literally no one here is so unloved that they have never been in an egoistic union. I bet you think spooks are "meaningless".
Bentley Ross
define spook
Michael Fisher
>Literally no one here is so unloved that they have never been in an egoistic union.
All the negatives in this sentence are confusing me.
What the fuck are you trying to say?
I am discussing his actual work, so fuck off.
Christopher Ward
>stirnerite is illiterate woah
Anthony Cook
le I didn't read the book so I'll shitpost
Go back to >>>/reddit/
Jace Gutierrez
stirner is the most redd*t 'philosopher' that exists he's pure pseud and only appeals to pseuds
define spook
Colton Reed
unions are a spook this guy gets it
Sage!
Josiah Phillips
It's not particularly difficult.
Everyone has someone who has, at some point, been involved in an egoistic union with them. Several someones, in fact.
Just think of our dear old mothers. I was arguing with an autist which made two of us who kept getting butthurt about my use of the word "spook", because I was obviously just throwing it around. So I just replaced "spook" with its definition, and he was happy.
The moral of the story is: people who hate "spookmemers" have no fucking clue what they're talking about. Holy shit, I thought you were joking.
Anything which is produced by the creative nothing which you nonetheless hold over yourself.
Nathaniel Stewart
Threadly reminder that Stirner is a Cartesian and for people too dumb to read Heidegger.
Back to buzzfeed.
Charles Price
Why would you read Buzzfeed? Serious question.
Hunter Reed
the creative nothing is a spook, reified by dumb kids who haven't engaged with heidegger
stop shilling your cartesianism, no intelligent person buys your semantic distinctions that somehow make stirner's ego not a complete spook
also, he was a literal cuck
Ryder Parker
So you don't know the definition of Spook yet criticise Stirner?
That is quite literally NOT an argument. I am not one of these Stirner posters.
Try reading his actual chapter on Spooks if you want to find out instead of speaking about books you haven't read.
I'll give you a hint, redditard, it's part 4 (The Owner), chapter 3 (my self enjoyment)
Hudson Price
>Anyone here ever been part of a Union of Egoists?
Yes, actually. It was Stirner, his wife, and her lover.
Jaxon Lopez
Also while I am an egoist, even I am getting a bit tired of all the Stirner threads. Still, no more tired than all the Green and DFW and Pynchon threads. Fuck off spookmemermemer. And read Stirner's Critics, because you somehow didn't get it from The Ego.
Easton Martin
Stop samefagging, thanks.
Jack Nguyen
> get proven wrong > Y-YOU JUST HAVEN'T READ HIM
no intelligent person is going to waste their time on this guy
stirner is for adolescents only
Benjamin Long
Oh wow, I didn't catch that. Christ, this is some special autism. Maybe we should post more Stirner threads...
Ryan Campbell
OP here.
No one who has posted in this thread so far has shown any ounce of having read Stirner.
The thread is made up of two groups:
1. The people who meme the word 'Spook' like effeminate nu-males
2. The people who hate 1. and think I (the OP) am one of them I am neither 1 nor 2.
Kindly, fuck off!
Charles Lewis
Notice how you didn't deny my critique. Interesting.
I guess I am right.
Sage!
Ian Miller
>creative nothing I take it that this is essentially means higher principle. If I lived my life for the sole purpose of making sure my kids had as good of a life as possible, would the product of my major motivation in life be a 'spook'? Is going to work and providing for my family a spook? Is discipline a spook?
Help me out here.
>people who hate "spookmemers" have no fucking clue what they're talking about irony
Oliver Myers
Why would you ask me to define Spook? It's an incredibly minuscule part of Stirner's philosophy that literally appears a couple of times in a book with hundreds of pages. This thread is about the Union of Egoists.
Go back to
Gabriel Rivera
>I take it that this is essentially means higher principle. Why would you take that. >If I lived my life for the sole purpose of making sure my kids had as good of a life as possible, would the product of my major motivation in life be a 'spook'? No. Your product would be a real thing. Your major motivation in life would be a spook. >irony Oh boy you sure showed me user.
Jonathan Martinez
>Global Rule 7
Charles Russell
>there are still only 4 IPs in this thread Huh...
Brayden Thomas
>Your major motivation in life would be a spook So having any motivation in life outside of personal pleasure is a spook?
Gavin Reed
Blame the Redditors that came to shit it up because they don't know how to read an OP.
Or are you one of them? Huh...
Nathan Sanchez
Outside of what you want to do. Bitch we talked about unions and you just complained about negatives. If you want to talk about them, talk about them.
Christopher Diaz
Wowie can I join in the samefagging?
Stirner is a pseud! A pseud!
Juan Ross
>Outside of what you want to do. Ok, so from what I gather, Stirner is the new pseudophilosopher icon for edgy teenage nihilists who lack the IQ to be logically coherent in their belief structure because they're not white. Got it.
Parker Phillips
Yep, you did it user! You understand Stirner as much as the best of Veeky Forums. And you didn't even need to read him!
Jaxon Sullivan
Still waiting on that 'spook' definition.
Dylan Turner
No you aren't.
Joshua Foster
No you are not.
Gavin Sullivan
No, you aren't.
Lincoln Ward
Negative thou art not.
Kevin Martinez
no u
aren't
woah
Asher Bailey
We are unique.
Camden Ross
define the goddamn word
Sebastian Bell
But we did. >nuh-uh I didn't like that definition Sorry kid.
Ryan Young
He already did you dongle.
Sebastian Ross
>43 posts >4 IPs
Jackson Miller
>implying anyone has ever done anything besides what they wanted
Nathaniel Morales
Yes. >Oh but I mustn't masturbate! My good Catholic schoolteacher told me it was immoral. As opposed to you yourself deciding you don't want to masturbate for whatever reason.
Landon Ortiz
>for whatever reason.
Like you agreeing to go to a Catholic school and submitting to its authority?
Dylan Adams
JUST
Brandon Brown
>But we did You literally didn't.
Chase Parker
Like you thinking it is a better idea to do what your Catholic school tells you to do than to masturbate. This is -you- thinking this, by the way.
>Have you philosophers really no clue that you have been beaten with your own weapons? Only one clue. What can your common sense reply when I dissolve dialectically what you have merely posited dialectically? You have showed me with what kind of ‘volubility’ one can turn everything to nothing and nothing to everything, black into white and white into black. What do you have against me, when I return to you your pure art? —Max Stirner
jesus christ what an edgy pseudointellectual fedora retard
Huh...so this is the power...of the anti-stirnerite...woah
Matthew Carter
Have you actually read his book though?
I hate the "SPOOKY" posters as much as anyone, but he really ties solipsism to politics in a very novel and interesting way.
Levi Williams
>I hate the "SPOOKY" posters as much as anyone Aw, are they too difficult to argue against?
William Russell
Memes aren't arguments, what you're doing is no different than Ctrl+V.
Have you even read the book?
Thomas Turner
Stirner is a spook.
Liam Martin
Yes, that's how I know it's not a meme. Memer. At this point, yes, he is.
Wyatt Taylor
spook spelled backwards koops, which is really k' oops
stirner mistake
Adrian Cooper
I've never read Heidegger. How does he invalidate Stirner?
I always thought Stirner had some good points about not being a slave to anything. I'll admit I haven't read much philosophy, though.
Can I just start reading Heidegger immediately or do I need some background. Don't give me the Greeks meme either or it'll be a decade before I can read the fucking guy.
Ayden Adams
You can really just read the Republic and a few Stanford articles over the course of like one week and have a really solid foundation on the Greeks.
Anthony Garcia
Mb Nichomachean ethics, too. Just to see what a fucking hack Aristotle is.
Brandon Barnes
Bare bones necessities for Heidegger are Heraclitus and Husserl. If you want to actually understand him, you'll also need Descartes, Hume, Kant, Hegel, and Kierkegaard. Nietzsche and Freud wouldn't hurt either.
Austin Fisher
So wait, how many people does it take to have a union of egoists?
Jace Nelson
Two, at minimum. Any less and it's more like masturbation.
Elijah Hernandez
>nihilism into the trash it goes
Aaron Turner
There are a lot of great uses for that dirty baby, just make sure its only bath water in the bucket
Julian Stewart
Should one rape if they felt like it and were certain they would not be caught?
asking for a friend
Cameron Foster
>also, he was a literal cuck out of all the possibilities of this thread I am most interested in this (I am a cuck cuck) , give us the deets plz?
Ethan Robinson
>>implying anyone has ever done anything besides what they wanted >implying slavery has never existed >implying the concept of 'spook' is the concept of the entire spectrum of types of slaveries, from physical to subtle mental
Levi Lopez
Stirner is a Doctor, if you are not sick, you dont need his medicine
Mason Adams
The world has long been based on Unions of Egoists. What do you think Families are, what do you think Corporations is?
Josiah Richardson
>should No.
However, would it be rational? Yes. It's much more complicated than "would I be caught" though; you must consider everything that factors into deciding what you should do.
For myself, this means the actual answer to your question is "no". But maybe you're more psychopathic, what do I know.
Andrew Carter
You don't understand how a union of egoists works.
Kindly fuck off.
Jacob Brown
>Anyone here ever been part of a Union of Egoists?
I have not, the closest I have come is having a free association with a few friends and family members who whilst they arent familiar with him effectively practice the thought in this respect.
>I have been in quite the few Interesting, can you share your experiences of how you found these as well as how they formed?
>once one begins to suffer within the Union and cannot reap the rewards of his property, he has condemned the Union to disrepute and it becomes a party like figure, a sham.
The difficulty I find with this is the question of long term vs short term suffering. Gym membership and networking with others is something that I loathe doing, however the end product ultimately servers my interests enough to justify it in the short term.
>Something I notice about such Unions is that the moment they begin to have rules or a structure they begin to fall apart.
Which is why Stirners thought will never become a "popular" reality, people are far too unique for large unions to be feasible.
>How would one break down Academic establishments in order to form their polar opposite, the Union?
Destroy the state and copyright laws would probably help.
Evan Morris
>You don't understand how a union of egoists works. >Kindly fuck off. currently fucking myself off...hard.....kindly
Explain
Thomas Reed
...
Samuel Murphy
...
Christian Smith
...
Zachary White
But Stirner and Nietzsche compliment each other to perfection.