/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3496607]

How does one incorporate the philosophy of Max Stirner into their life?

[Anonymous No.3496621]

[Anonymous No.3496627]

Be under 18.

[Anonymous No.3496635]

Do as you please, don't get caught up in spooks. That's all really. There's not really a Stirnerist practice because Stirner frees one from precisely the idea that one should adhere to some external ideology, so whatever you end up doing when freed from that is just what you want.

Feels pretty strange at first to just do as you please without all kinds of lofty realisations.

[Anonymous No.3496637]

Se tuer mon frere.

[Anonymous No.3496673]

>>3496635

But what if I were to say that lofty ideals are what fuel us to do great deeds?

[Anonymous No.3496687]

>>3496673

I would say you would be right. That's why the other anon said "be under 18." The same can be said for anarchism and libertarianism.

[Anonymous No.3496692]

>>3496673
>great deeds
I would say that you are still spooky enough for both of us.

[Anonymous No.3496694]

>>3496687
Not having lofty ideals is childish now?

[Anonymous No.3496706]

>>3496694

Yeah.

[Anonymous No.3496751]

>>3496673
That's almost as foolish as the reply that springs to mind-

'We can do no great things, only small things with great love.'
What are great deeds? What is 'lofty' to mean? They are not linked, ideologically.

[Anonymous No.3496845]

>>3496706
That's alright, you are in the second stage. The third will follow swiftly.

[Anonymous No.3496905]

I like how people still mistake Stirner for being edgy. In the end what is called his egoism isn't egoistic in the ethical sense, it's egoistic in the sense that the motivation for ones actions stem from oneself without being seduced by external tempers who try to manipulate you into doing their own bidding. Stirners philosophy is emancipatory. How one lives one's life after this cleansing is what comes from oneself, what springs up for one's own well. To me Stirners thought has almost mystical aspects and goes way beyond "fuck you I won't do what you tell me". Of course it may very well lead to that and there is nothing particularly strange about a Stirnerist embracing illegalism or something like that. On the other hand, there's nothing strange about a Stirnerist living like a saint either. If anything, an act of kindness from someone who embraces Stirners thought is more truly kind than one from someone who has accepted compassion as a homework assignment from God.

[None !!lZetafI6z8s No.3496942]

It'll just happen organically

[Anonymous No.3496948]

Just accept Max as your lord and savior.

[Anonymous No.3496976]

>>3496905

But Stirner makes morality evaporate into thin air. Surely someone who posits no right or wrong is fairly edgy in our society?

[Anonymous No.3497020]

>>3496976
But morality does not actually exist. It's an abstract concept that varies from culture to culture and even amongst individuals.

[Anonymous No.3497043]

>>3497020
If morality does not exist how can it vary from inidvidual to individual?

[Anonymous No.3497050]

>>3496976
>in our society
>implying society is worth a shit

[Anonymous No.3497054]

>>3497020
>But morality does not actually exist
But it does, and it is truly tangible. I am touching it as I'm writing this.

You shouldn't be generalizing; it's a rookie mistake, pal. The fact, that you haven't seen morality, doesn't mean no one hasn't!

It's beautiful ;_;

[Anonymous No.3497059]

>>3496976
I'd say moral relativism is fairly accepted and even expected from someone of even moderate intelligence.

[Anonymous No.3497082]

>>3496905
This guy has it. Basically, do everything in the name of no-one but yourself. This doesn't mean go off on a Randian binge and talk about how everything (emphasis on thing) should be yours, but rather, recognize that pleasures and self-motivation go beyond petty materialism and encompasses the subjective and ideal as well. Thus, if your fellow man/woman is happy, chances are you will be as well; happiness is contagious. This is a basic interpretation of Stirner's "union of egoists", which utterly destroys fixed ideas (spooks) like "individualism" and "collectivism", as if Stirner's other stuff didn't do so already.

On a side note, I always find it funny how people consider Stirner a proto-Nietzsche or (god forbid) proto-Rand and then use his ideas to argue for capitalism/fascism/racism/nationalism, even though any decently literate person can see that Stirner blasted those as well as liberal, left-wing, humanist sentiments.

[Anonymous No.3497148]

>>3497082

How is Stirner not proto-Nietzsche?

[Anonymous No.3497161]

>>3496694
Stirner said that idealism is part of part of adolescence, and that egoism comes at adulthood (or something like that.) It's not childish, it's just misguided.

Stirner didn't believe that everything must go, that we have to get rid of ideals as a whole. He just believed that these ideas have to be accepted by individuals through their own self-interest rather than imposed on them.

[Anonymous No.3497207]

>>3497148
Why you would have any reason to believe that he would be is the better question.

[Anonymous No.3497254]

[Anonymous No.3497261]

>>3497254
lel

[Anonymous No.3497289]

>>3497207
no it's not.

[Anonymous No.3497294]

>>3497254

[Anonymous No.3497312]

>>3497289
Just name some reasons why you think Stirner is Nietzsche's predecessor if it's so obvious.

[Anonymous No.3497325]

>>3496607
He isn't your fucking gateway into becoming the super slick guy you've always wanted to be, but were entirely not even close to being growing up. Stop projecting how lame you are through philosophy because its more a detriment to criticism than anything else.

[Anonymous No.3497331]

>>3497325
wat

[Anonymous No.3497374]

>>3497020
>It's an abstract concept that varies from culture to culture and even amongst individuals.
>does not actually exist.
You are making me confused here.

[Anonymous No.3497380]

>>3497374
anon's saying that it doesn't exist objectively, unless you count all the variations held amongst individuals as the objective morality.

[Anonymous No.3497394]

>>3497380
so whatever does not exist objectively doesn't 'actually' exist in anon's opinion?

[Anonymous No.3497406]

>>3497394
he also obviously acknowledged that it does.

[Anonymous No.3497408]

>>3497406
anon is pretty clumsy with his statements

[Anonymous No.3497409]

>>3496905
>>3497082

so you still wind up philosophizing in the end anyways.

mankinds obsession with deconstruction and anti-philosophy is so tiring.

[Anonymous No.3497465]

>>3497409
>so you still wind up philosophizing in the end anyways.
It seems like you say that as if Stirner is supposed to be anti-philosophy.

[Anonymous No.3497478]

Lrn2Antinomy

[Anonymous No.3497707]

>>3497325
>He isn't your fucking gateway into becoming the super slick guy you've always wanted to be
You're right, he isn't. He's calling for enlightened self-interest and total destruction of society, both physically and metaphysically.

[Anonymous No.3497729]

>>3496607

you can't incorporate Stirners philosophy at all.

Every desire, wish, goal, preference and choice you make is conditioned by forces outside of your "will" or "self"

there is nothing genuine you can tap into.
you will always be a slave to the conditions that create you.

[Anonymous No.3497737]

>>3497729

lol you emasculated bitch

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3497742]

>drop all ambitions and goals
>drop any life guiding principle
>whine like a little faggot at the least bit of responsibility
>"you should get a job. how are you going to feed yourself anon?"
>"all tings are nothing to me"
>"but you havent eaten in days, let me at least get you some ointment for those bed sores"
>"fuck you ointment is spook"
>??????????
>stirnerbird.mpeg

[None !!lZetafI6z8s No.3497743]

>>3497742
thanks for projecting

[Anonymous No.3497753]

>>3497742

[Anonymous No.3497758]

>>3497729
obviously those are just stirner's INCORRECT beliefs

what are you going to do about it, you depressing little nihilist pussy? fuck buddha he was all wrong

fuck atheists too

[Anonymous No.3497771]

>>3497020
I swear we need to start torturing moral nihilists to death.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3497773]

who the fuck is this inconsequential faggot>>3497743and why is he unaware of my awesomeness

[None !!lZetafI6z8s No.3497812]

>>3497773
yeah yeah i know who you are, but you're so fucking weird about stirner now.

[Anonymous No.3497869]

>>3497729
yeah this

the whole egoism thing collapses once you realize the conditionality of that which we call the 'self'

The only way to truly be free is to realize that this self is inherently empty of fixed essence-existence and - paradoxically - to stop trying to 'be free'. Only then can truly spontaneous action arise.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3497911]

>>3497812

pardon my earlier plebe reading.

the ubermensch must inherently follow the principles he sets, otherwise the normative force of his ideals would be nullified. of course he is not "bound" by one specific principle, he can choose to discard it, however he is at every specific point in time "bound" by the totality of principles not being questioned, ...which for max constitutes a 'spook', and in weighing stirner against freddy the choice was obvious.

[Anonymous No.3497938]

>>3497869

You've been conditioned to think that "the self" is a construction of the influences around you, which is in and of itself a spook- you are not advertising, the movies, the fast food, the books, the faggotry- that you consume, you are an individual human being, and the great lie is that your environment makes you who you are. You were born the man you would become, and the environment, if of any significant, is ultimately of no consequence. It's not that you aren't free, it's simply that you are unwilling to accept the responsibility of complete freedom.

We are always free to act in exactly the way we wish to. We enjoy complete freedom now. All else is a spook. You fear consequences. Destroy these fears.

[Anonymous No.3497941]

Reading him would be a good first step

[Anonymous No.3497942]

>>3497941
aint gon read all dat shit faggot
reading is a fukkin spook

dont u trust lit

[Anonymous No.3497946]

Is stirner the official /lit/core philosopher?

[Anonymous No.3497948]

>>3497946

Yes.

[Anonymous No.3497957]

>>3497938
>conditioned
>the environment, if of any significance, is ultimately of no consequence

how are those tiny glasses working for you?

[Anonymous No.3497984]

>>3497312
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_Friedrich_Nietzsche_and_Max_Stirner

[Anonymous No.3497989]

>>3497946
i actually think nietzsche, the cynics, or heidegger are likelier candidates

i barely think of stirner as a philosopher

prescriptive politics for self is extremely limited, and as far as i know he only wrote one thing

[Anonymous No.3497998]

>>3497465

>its all spooks lel

>not anti-philosophy

question remains, why should i do this instead of that.

[Anonymous No.3498031]

>>3497938
i still dont think you understand

even if you completely stripped away environment, there remain plenty of ways one could still obliterate the self

[Anonymous No.3498072]

>>3497043
>It's an abstract concept
>that varies from culture to culture
>even amongst individuals.

What's not to understand?
It's not concrete. That's it.

[Anonymous No.3498077]

>>3497729
>implying the self exists

[Anonymous No.3498199]

>>3498072
>abstract concept that exists
>abstract concepts don`t exist
>Existence= nonexistence
Protagoras pls go

[Anonymous No.3498254]

>>3498199
>mo·ral·i·ty

noun/məˈralətē/ /mô-/
moralities, plural

Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior


>>3497020
>that varies from culture to culture and even amongst individuals.

[Anonymous No.3498263]

take points from lil b

[Anonymous No.3498548]

Stanford, why did you delete your post on Stirner and ointment?

[Anonymous No.3498718]

itt: People misrepresent someone they've never read

THAT IS HOW AWESOME ST.MAX BE

[Anonymous No.3499081]

Damn, too bad I missed this. I was going to point out how there are strong parallels between what Stirner calls Spooks and the irrational construction of the super-ego, and a Reichian conception of mental health. Basically, from Julien Offray de la Mettrie to Stirner and Reich, the more insightful nihilists have realized that prophylaxis is your best shot at mental freedom. If your psychic setup is such that an irrational moral compass has been entrenched into your mind, it is highly unlikely that you will be able to get rid of it (although Stirner does correctly identify both the detrimental effect on the body and libido of these spooks, as well as the role that those play in getting rid of them, 'Jauchzen'). There is a fundamental question here in whether to try and break down your terrain or whether to deal with the symptoms... and in a way this is parallel to the problems of trying to go 'the long haul' for creating a group of people who are sane enough to make a union of egoists possible, or to live like Jünger's anarch in the more or less phony (but not really phony because it is a self-conscious petty bourgeois state of being) detached kind of socialization.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3500111]

>>3498548

pangs of conscience; that pic zeta tripfag posted brought me back to my stirnerite days...i've been acting like a dick, shit talking max to spite his followers, when in reality i owe a lot of my psychological growth to him.

[Anonymous No.3500117]

>>3500111

Not to mention the fact that you used to spam him relentlessly two years ago

[Anonymous No.3500152]

>>3500111
I know that feel. I'd still say your particular flavour of sort of Nietzscheanism isn't all that incompatible with Stirner though, since it's using self-made ideals very consciously (partly thanks to Stirner in the back of your mind I guess) of the fact that it's your own creation to follow by you because it pleases you, which is thoroughly different from the sort of dimwitted servantile dedication to some external idea you just happen to be instilled with. Caught any smiles lately?

[None !!lZetafI6z8s No.3500263]

>>3500152
i feel like stan's struggling internally with his egoistic desire for ubermenschism and wants to totally accept the principles and 'suppressive spooks' (to 'not be a faggot' regardless of the nihilism he accepts, not sure if there is any other real reason he wants to be ubermensch) and it makes him angry at stirner who poses a barrier in his complete acceptance of these principles and' suppressive spooks'

am i wrong stan

[Anonymous No.3500273]

>>3496607
be basically any pre-adolescent teenager ever

[Anonymous No.3500792]

Bump

[Anonymous No.3500819]

Your choice.

[Anonymous No.3503093]

saved from page 10

[Anonymous No.3503103]

>>3503093
thank god, I was afraid of losing this thread

[Anonymous No.3503116]

>>3503103
really?

[Anonymous No.3503180]

>>3503103

[Anonymous No.3503256]

>>3503180
>>3503116
>>3503093
i allege that these posts were all submitted by the same person

[Anonymous No.3503273]

>>3497020
Hmm, morality does exist.
A better word for it would be foresight.

[Anonymous No.3503289]

>>3503256
Better luck next time, barrister.

[Anonymous No.3503394]

>>3497729
So basically this was the only practical and rational response in the thread?

[Anonymous No.3503739]

>>3503394
no

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3504646]

>>3500263

lelele check out fucking sigmund over here but yeah you're wrong and there is no internal struggle between my nihilistic backdrop and normative ethic, the latter rises from the former and you're a naive little schoolboy for thinking that any written text could possibly pose a barrier to a persons selffulfillment,
philosophy merely reinforces ones predispositions; upon full understanding of stirner (post pleb reading) i realized that he was incompatible with my nature

>>3500152

>le why-the-fuck-do-you-keep-asking-me-that goatanon question

no i've been hungover and hibernating all day and just get a fucking tripcode already

[Anonymous No.3504648]

>>3504646

>le nihilist denial

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3504654]

>>3504648

>le terrible reading comprehension

[None !!lZetafI6z8s No.3504659]

>>3504646
>upon full understanding of stirner (post pleb reading) i realized that he was incompatible with my nature
in what way?

[Anonymous No.3504907]

>>3604654


ahhh.. monsieur! faux-ignorance is a shroud that belittles you.

for what reason would you bring such ugliness upon my weary eyes, monsieur?

[sage No.3504919]

>>3496948
I lost my shit, thank you so much.

[Anonymous No.3505295]

>>3504648
>he doesn't understand post-nihilism

[sage No.3505535]

Nope

[Anonymous No.3505609]

>>3497020
>>3497020

>human behavior has a causal relationship to biology

>Temperament influences morality

>Therefore, morality has objective predictors. Human morality exists empirically.

Nonetheless, morality is still ultimately subjective. Just stop asserting that it "doesn't exist".

[Anonymous No.3505648]

>lel everything is spooks
>not a spook in and of itself

There's a paragraph or so early on that you should also be reconsidering that all the time. Don't be bound to Stirner because Stirner wouldn't like that. Use everything but don't think use is the end of itself, the "thing in itself" of some set of ethics. It's just... keep becoming... but don't always justb ecoming OHGODICAN'TSTOPICAN'TDEFINEMYSELFBYLANGUAGE!

[Anonymous No.3505655]

>>3505295
>post-

[Anonymous No.3505679]

>>3505609
>>human behavior has a causal relationship to biology
>>Temperament influences morality
>>Therefore, morality has objective predictors. Human morality exists empirically.


That's not accurate. Every individual is biologically unique, every behavioural pattern is unique, thus every 'morality' that you would derive from this would be limited to one particular subject, which is what we call 'subjective'...

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3505703]

>>3496627
lol not being deluded is being under 18 now. Makes sense.

>>3496673
>Genocide, holy wars, immolations, Inquisition, alienation,...
>Great things

Yeah, sure.

[Anonymous No.3505704]

>>3496687
Anarchism is not a lofty ideal? Do you even Tolstoy?

[Anonymous No.3505796]

>>3505679
>>3505679

I just fucking said is was subjective, you shithead.

"Human morality patterns" share a causal relationship with human biology, therefore have objective foundations.

This refutes the notion of morality "not existing" in a materialistic context.

Fuck you, guy.

[Anonymous No.3505836]

>>3505796
>"Human morality patterns" share a causal
fucking causals, they ruin everything

[Anonymous No.3505891]

>>3505796
>"Human morality patterns" share a causal relationship with human biology, therefore have objective foundations.
>This refutes the notion of morality "not existing" in a materialistic context.

That is a bullshit argument. Because you are assuming that any concept has some physical correlate, this would mean that unicorns also 'exist in a materialistic context', because the concept of unicorns has a neurological correlate. However, they don't exist as unicorns, they exist as concepts. Same with morals.

[Anonymous No.3505899]

>>3505836

[Anonymous No.3505903]

>lifestyle philosophy


sure is a faget hipster and/or dilettante in here

[Anonymous No.3505936]

>>3505903
All great philosophy is (partly) lifestyle philosophy. Seperating philosophy for life in that tiresome academic analytical manner is what caused it's death. Wisdom is precisely the how to live.

[Anonymous No.3505980]

>>3505891
>>3505891

Unicorns are a projection of behavior, whereas "root morality" is an agent of it.

I would argue that there is, in a sense, a "human philosophy" coded into our DNA. Heredity limits our behavior to a specific range of possibilities relative to our environment. Thus, we have an inborn rationale for our drives and decision making.

Morality is a non-physical concept, of course, but I believe is has strong ties to our biology. To argue it "does not exist" would be equivalent to asserting behavior doesn't exist, only the neurological agents.

I'm probably babbling, I've been up for a couple days.

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3506017]

>>3505903
You probably never heard about Epicurus, the stoics or the cynics.

>>3505899
lol this is great

[Anonymous No.3506610]

saved

[Anonymous No.3506745]

>>3496621
lol'd

[Anonymous No.3507670]

That drawing of Stirner is better than his own work.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3507752]

>>3504659

hehrehrhhrhrrhr in ways i the fuck literally laid out within this same thread you knob.
i'll try shorter sentences:
1.Uber is spook.
2.I are uber.
3.I are spook.

[Anonymous No.3508386]

saved

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3508529]

>>3507670
This is what plebs actually think.

At least put some effort into criticizing him.

[Anonymous No.3508664]

>>3505936
Could you or someone please recommend me "lifestyle philosophy" books?

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3508812]

>>3508664
Obviously, Stirner
Nietsche's On the genealogy of morality
Aristotle's Nichomachean ethics
Seneca's letters and dialogues
Epicurus' letters
Anything about the cynics
Kierkegaard's bibliography
The complete works of Antonin Artaud (a lot of poetry, plays and weird stuff which is obscure as fuck but interesting).

I'm missing a lot, but these are my favorite ones.

[Anonymous No.3508885]

>>3508812
>no Kant

listen nigger, at least, have some respect for the guy; definitely deserves a mention.

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3508926]

>>3508885
No, he doesn't.
Take your deonthologic bullshit away from me.
What kind of lifestyle would be Kant's? "Hey, guys look at my severe autism! I also think masturbation is intrinsically bad, at least go fuck some prostitues instead"?

[Deep&Edgy !UfFKGtFx2M!!/0aWHODYBc0 No.3508938]

listening to a mentally ill french actor is more worthwhile than reading anything by one of the keystones of modern philosophy without whom Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Stirner would not even exist

[Anonymous No.3508955]

>>3508926
urine fucking idiot

welcome to my shitlist

[Anonymous No.3509463]

>>3508664
Guy you're responding to here. Anal guy's recommendations are pretty good, but I would especially stress Hellenistic philosophy and my favourites the Cynics.

This is a great introduction that offers you information on all the Hellenistic schools, listening to all of them will make you a more informed, wise and happy person in every way:
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/hellenistic

I've been trying to collect works on the Hellenistic schools, but I haven 't got into it thoroughly enough to recommend anything apart from the Cynics, who are my greatest and true love. For my Cynic library, visit my Mediafire:

http://www.mediafire.com/?zp2ppnxjwj28c

There's a .txt there with the best way to go about it, but I'll save you a few seconds and say Classical Cynicism is probably what you want to read first. It's a scholarly, contemporary text that offers a very thorough and comprehensive view on Cynicism in Ancient Greece and Rome. The Cynics are known as possessing the 'shortcut to virtue' and therefore the good life. While I can't claim to be a proper Cynic (I'm still too decadent and comfortable for that) applying their ideas in multiple ways to my life has served me well.

For a quick preliminary taste of delicious Diogenes anecdotes visit this page:

http://members.optushome.com.au/davidquinn000/Diogenes%20Folder/Diogenes.html

A heckler in the crowd shouted out, "My mind is not made like that, I can't be bothered with philosophy."

"Why do you bother to live," Diogenes retorted, "if you can't be bothered to live properly?"

[Anonymous No.3509476]

>>3508926
>deonthologic

[Anonymous No.3509488]

>>3509463
>A heckler in the crowd shouted out, "My mind is not made like that, I can't be bothered with philosophy."
>"Why do you bother to live," Diogenes retorted, "if you can't be bothered to live properly?"

Sorry, but that was a weak one.

[Anonymous No.3509502]

>>3509488
It was merely an introductory statement in the "Welcome... to Jurassic Park! tuuuduuuudududu" sense, not ah 'lol Diogenes so random & fahnny xD' type of thing.

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3509734]

>>3509476
I'm not an English speaker, but I bet you're intelligent enough to guess what was my point, faggot.

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3509744]

>>3508955
"urine"...?
Nice rebuttal anyway.

[Anonymous No.3509765]

>>3509734
>>3509744
>hurrr durr i can be stan tooooo

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3509797]

>>3509765
Congratulations. Nice rebuttal, again. Keep it up.
I'll be waiting for a proper argument.

[Anonymous No.3509890]

>>3509797
lelleel caled the fuck out

[Anonymous No.3512429]

SAVED

[Anonymous No.3512433]

swog

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3512465]

>>3508938

>let me bring up hegel for no fucking reason so that people think i'm le deep

its funny how beyond the semiclouded reference of that post lies nothing but the crudest kind of poseurish irrelevance.
dude, you're like, way the fuck past your prime your depth can now be measured within a tablespoon of lad jizz (scraped off your chin after le night out w the lads, how are the lads, etc)

[Anonymous No.3512477]

Damn D&E, stan be eatin ya.
Dont lettem do dis mane. Mane u got dis. NIGGAI KNOW U GOT DIS

[Anonymous No.3512483]

>>3496635
Just want to point out how absolutely stupid this picture and post are

[Anonymous No.3512487]

>>3512483
Why are they stupid?

[Anonymous No.3512515]

>>3497989
He wrote three different books. The only one I can't find is The History of Reaction.

[Anonymous No.3512538]

>02/22/13(Fri)17:10
>today is Wednesday Feb 27

i'm not sure whether to be mad you keep bumping your old thread or glad that you are keeping all this shit in one thread instead of spamming him in every philosophy thread that pops up

yolo i guess

[Anonymous No.3513009]

>>3512538

youre doing the same thing retard

[Anonymous No.3513533]

>>3513009

Stop bumping the thread.

[Anonymous No.3513537]

>>3512465
>>3512465
>your depth can now be measured within a tablespoon of lad jizz (scraped off your chin after le night out w the lads, how are the lads, etc)

Ouch.
Kindling the embers of the tripfag antagonism.