/lit/ - Literature

>>12642158
>You are what you do
That sounds descriptive and lame. Not only can you not know what you do, meaning know the causal chain of effects that originates with this "you", but you can also not know that you don't know what effects are attributed to that you who is in question. The question is itself suspect, as in who is you when you ask yourself what descriptions and information can be given to secure a (you). The ideal self holds nothing because then it acts infinitely towards whatever ends it deems fit. But then can you desire your desires? If you can correct yourself to not have desires, are you doing so for yourself or for the ends of others? Can the infinite negation of language ever stop saying, "I'm thirsty, or I'm drowning." >>12643534
There is nothing enlightening about finding loopholes to nickle and dime people, or justify taking someone's innocence. Stirner is for tech-scribes what Rand is for the oligarchs. I prefer radical individualism only in my political institutions, and then only in relation to an educated public whose ideals can still be shaped by the environment of the region. Within that, Stirner is useless except as a motivational speaker for overly selfconscious twats and selfabsorbed anarchists.

>>12447794
The divide is over. You have been conquered by material concerns and attachments to necessary illusions.

>>12409940

>>12407404
>>12407416

>>12367790
This is not a semantic loophole if you are talking about a single brain and that brains methods of understanding their self-construction or their projection of the world. The divine is made manifest not just by ignorance but by necessity of existence in the world. You need narrative structure, you cannot be without it, and therefore if it is not divine, it is at least sacred, and then therefore why not divine to the materialist. Why can we not sing of love as we do of truth, with open ears to the cadences that mark this harmony in conversation, even if that is antagonism.

>>12321207
Is this ok?

>>12197020
This entire false dichotomy of centralization and decentralization are so abstract that it is no wonder bureaucracies crumble. Your conceptual tools are empty people and they've got to find you in there someday.

>>12135487
If you want to use words, logic, mathematics to understand human psychology you need to study your tools and know their history so that you can unpack your desire to know before you accept knowing anything. Otherwise you can only exist as a tool loaded with information that is displayed during rote acts of communication.