[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.19629953 [View]
File: 13 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19629953

>>19629924
(Obviously both the traffic light and the vegan example are mine, not his)

>> No.13776637 [View]
File: 13 KB, 128x165, 1447636143938.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13776637

>>13776000
how can he be right if he isn't saying anything?

>> No.9166722 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9166722

>>9166656
I said I agree with you right away, m8

>>9166660
>but do you see the spook here?
No I don't.

The feeling of hunger is not a spook.
Being afraid that your father is going to punch you is not a spook.

Wanting to be the richest man in the world is a spook.
Thinking you should to marry and have kids is a spook.

Why do you think Stirners book would give a solution to every trade-off decision in life?
Besides, the book talks much longer about Stirnerian property than it talks about spooks. Spooks really are a meme, here. Stirner doesn't fucking equal spooks. That's just the first part of the book.

>> No.8097947 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8097947

I realize this is hardly possible, but this ought to be a serious thread. Question:

What are your spooks, which harm you least, if you continue to pursue them unreflectedly?
I'm thinking of fixed ideas, that you have put above yourself, which -even if you're to lazy to actively recognize them as you go through your day- are and will not be a particular problem.

I'm thinking about this from the perspective that being aware of yourself to some utopian Stirnerian extent isn't actually possible - it's probably my biggest problem with his thesis.

>> No.7306126 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7306126

>>7305654
Nietsche was in agony because of sicknesses and angry as fuck, what's he gonna do? If I recall correctly, Stirner is described by his contemporaries as comfy.

And yes, I read Standford articles, in particular about people (e.g. the Kierkegaard article gives an overview which let's you get his position, that's directly or indirectly woven into his work, and is revealed in the books only over the years), and niche formal logics.

>> No.7014797 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014797

I don't get the reference

>> No.6761114 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6761114

>>6761028
If you had no interest in philosophy before, possibly not read upon communism, state law, and don't know the language of Hegels times,
how did you go through all the critiques from roughly p.100 to p. 200 without being confused or at least bored?

>> No.6664689 [View]
File: 35 KB, 128x165, fw_spooky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6664689

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]