/lit/ - Literature

>>23145254

I've recently delved into Stirner's philosophy with an analytical bent and discovered that he appears to be delineating, thus amplifying the importance of, the specific stage in Jungian individuation wherein the ego must break away from the collective cultural consciousness after its voluntarily having identified with a functional social persona.

It seems as though Stirner had stumbled into the necessity of breaking away from the collective, yet his philosophy does not necessarily advise in a positive sense how the ego, once free and morally isolated, is meant to continue developing social competence in relation to negotiations with the collective. The underlying architecture of his philosophy is that one should narcissistically withdraw mental investment from collective forces and entities, and instead slyly arm the ego with this surreptitiously acquired surplus of energy; as a means of self-defense against the will of others who are, it is presumed, doing the same thing, and with, it seems according to Stirner, purely malicious intent.

So, the questions are begged here ...

>Are the ego and the collective unconscious at war with one another? Jung believes that the unconscious is the source of all growth for the ego, and that the ego, if given its way, would stagnate itself into catastrophe ...
>How does the incorporation of unconscious content into the ego occur if the ego is given primacy over all other wills, even that of the personal unconscious itself?
>Ownness appears to define itself as the capacity and capability of an individual to govern their own unconscious desires and passions in logical isolation from the will of the collective ... yet is this not technically completely impossible as a consequence of the necessity of universal language as a means to self-actualization through the enantiadromia of projection into introjection, of primordial extraversion into introverted speech?

While he himself may not have been a narcissist, his philosophy is most certainly deeply narcissistic in its essential logical character. It procures for itself an endless array of variegated justifications for the deification of the ego over the unconscious, thus the Jungian Self — it seems to posit the ideal of an ego disassociated from social or religious moral convention, having instead allowed itself to become composed out of an amalgamation of activities of the personal unconscious. It is highly scientific, not philosophically.

>>22731591
>"ubermensch" which nietzsche "moralizes" as "good"
Spooks.

>>22372594
>Absolute Spirit
Spooky as hell.

ITS LITERALLY BECAUSE OF ENGELS MEME DRAWING AND THE WORD SPOOK. /lit/ IS A MEME. IT'S ABOUT THE MEME POTENTIAL. 66 REPLIES AND NO ONE GETS TO THE TRUTH AND ANSWER OF OPS QUESTION. THIS BOARD IS DEAD. HISTORY IS FORGOTEN. TIME MOVES FORWARD BUT THE STASIS REMAINS.

I don't get it

>>19545838
wtf Stirner is even more based now!

Did you hear the news?

Can we get an ultimate Egoism list going?

>tfw your whole personal philosophy is just a rationalization of your narcissistic personality disorder

>>17574395
Secular humanism is no different than religion. Instead of serving god; you serve man and his morals. These views are functionally the same. Morality is a function human behavior. It only exists insofar I involuntarily serve it it. Men need no morality.

Was he a sociopath?

Why do brainlents insist this guy was a commie? He's an inherently anti-political philosopher, I'm a venture capitalist and there is literally zero reasons I have to dislike capitalism. According to Stiner I shouldn't bother with spooks like dialectical materialism and socialism and just do whatever suits me best. Plus he translated two foundational texts of neoliberal economics - Smith's Wealth of Nations and J. B. Say's Treatise on Political Economy

>>16424706

>"Hey, Engels, what you scribbling? Is tha- is that Stirner? Oh my God! Hey, everyone! "
>"N-no give it back!"
>"Check out Friedrich's drawing! Hahaha... Max look at this! This faggot drew a picture of you, sweet baby Jesus hahaha..."

>>14202788
Yes.

So this nigga was just an alter ego of Engels

Just getting into egoist philosophy, reading The Ego and His Own now.
Any other authors I should read after Stirner?
No spooky commies plz

Stirner of course

> Not going for true ending

>>11496752
in disguise

>>10944116

You win a gold star for making this post :)

>>10941801
Because it's my property.

The tiger respects no equals because the assumption that other tigers are it's equals arises from hypocracy. No tiger is it's equal, but I consider him, equally with all other beings, as my property. One tells me that I should "respect" the fellow tiger in them. They do not respect the unique I, rather they only respect the... tiger in me. If the I the unnameable act "untigerly", than the liberal turns on me and tries to restrict my freedom...