All memes aside, will reading Hegel faciliate my understanding of Stirner or is his philosophy self-sufficient as it is?

hegel condenses many useful philosophical notions into difficult-to-decipher sentences. as for schopenpleb's "opinion" of it, it is very interesting as it laid the groundwork for future analytic dismissals of entire fields based on them being "preposterous" or "weird"

>hegel condenses many useful philosophical notions into difficult-to-decipher sentences

Now, see I wouldn't even deny this. Hegal does have many genuinely novel and significant insights and I wouldn't deny him that, but I have barely seen anything close to a properly systematic justification of his approach. Often he will throw out seemingly bizarre statements without justification, with nothing else but the bare implication that once you understand his work as a whole and how it contrasts with the kinds of thinking he deems inadequate, you'll comprehend why he has delineated his thought as such. His frequent unwillingness to declare why he is discussing a given line of thought beforehand makes reading so much of his works a chore.

Just watch Gregory Sadler's half hour Hegel videos on YouTube. He talks about every paragraph in the Phenomenology.

Will do

>nobody giving systematic justification

empyreantrail.wordpress.com/method-and-system/

Nobody you say?

Not counting:

R.D. Winfield—Hegel and the Future of Systematic Philosophy

Alan White—Absolute Knowledge: Hegel and the Problem of Metaphysics

Ardis B. Collins—Hegel's Phenomenology: The Dialectical Justification of Philosophy's First Principles

Really? Lazy.

Hegel the skip and Stirner the JUST

I ordered "The Unique and It's Property" yesterday, which should be here sometime next week. I was tempted to order "Lectures on the Philosophy of History" by Hegel as well, but I was put off by his needlessly obscure density of style. Makes Aristotle look like a poet.

It's not that Hegel's metaphysics are disheartening me – I consider myself fairly well versed in Neo-Platonism, from it's Pagans expression in Late Antiquity to the Christian revival of the Renaissance. Hegel did hold Eriugena in great esteem, so he's obviously quite symphatetic to the Neoplatonic tradition. I've also read snippets from "Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition" which has further solidified my initial suspicion of his mystical bent.

With that said, what would you consider the primary value of Hegel? He is obviously fairly well read, but does he manage to do anything profound with this knowledge?

Stirner does not have a working philosophy. faggot thinks we should collectively run the bakery, his world view is very small

>stirner's """philosophy"""

DUDE DO WHATEVER U WANT LMAO
EVERYTHING IS A SPOOK

There is no use understanding what a stupid commie has to say.

yes
reading any philosophy will help with stirner but you're still capable of overall points with nothing at all. So yes and no.

their*

Absolute knowing and absolute knowledge of the Absolute.

If knowing anything absolutely does not draw you in away from dogmatism and postmodern skeptical nihilism, idk what could.

Careful, as we speak a horde of pseuds and raging autists are now furiously typing up paragraphs to defend to their last Cheetos soaked breath the delusions of their adored Mr Ghostbuster.
Prepare yourself.