/lit/ - Literature

>>4324416
Well, if you were holding on to your job out of concern for the greater good or giving back to society or something like that, Stirner would probably tell you to get over your superstitions. Which doesn't seem to be the case.

You just seem to have conflicting desires. You're not shackled by anything but your own choice, really. The behaviour you mention wouldn't be something contradictive to Stirner's thought. The man himself lived by borrowing money without any intention of paying it back in his later years. There's no mandatory outward integrity that comes with his thought. There's nothing in Stirner's work that would intrinsically speak for or against your behaviour. Stirner is all for self-enjoyment, but doesn't really talk much about how to bring it about. That's where Epicurus comes in handy.

Epicurus would say here that the way you seem to live your life isn't in your best interest, because duplicity works at the expense of the one engaging in the deceiving. By putting up an act, by simulating behaviour, you create a situation where you put yourself under a lot of stress. Feigning always saps a lot of energy out of you and in addition to that there's the possibility of being found out. That's why Epicurus would generally advice against deception simply because it fucks with your peace of mind. Which in turn could lead to the question why you're doing the work you do and if there isn't an alternative that doesn't take such a toll on your enjoyment of life. What ties you to this job?

>>3682277
I don't think I have the hubris any more for such endeavours. I've already done years of philosophical exploration and despair and staring into the abyss and all that. In the end there isn't really anything to be done over another thing. So I just live the life that pleases me, like a worriless satyr in a sunny meadow. You think I'm childish and not yet adult. I'd rather say I'm already beyond my mid-life crisis, which is where most people realise the futility and misguidedness of their frantic endeavours. When Diogenes asked Alexander what he would do when he was done conquering the world he responded that he would take it easy and enjoy himself. To which Diogenes, stretched out in the sun, of course asked why he wouldn't skip the whole conquering thing and enjoy himself as it is. External justifications eventually fall apart, the only way to justify your choices to yourself is to create a life that is worth living for it's own sake.

>>3682289
That's a Diogenes quote, which accounts for the playful arrogance. I don't consider myself all that special though, but I do think the simple life is superior. Most ambitious people are vain, decadent, greedy and misguided. What else would explain people pursuing careers? Why would anyone put in 60 hours a week at some law firm except for some stunted misgrowth of desire? Of course you may argue that some are happiest that way, but I'd say the percentage that actually optimise their happiness by pursuing this path is negligible.

>>3399144
>>3399168
>>3399188
Thanks, friends!

>>3399259
Doesn't look like complete shit at first glance, but may I suggest this podcast as an introduction?

http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-principles

Episodes on Stoicism:
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-principles
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-epistemology
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-physics
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-ethics
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/stoics-sedley
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/seneca
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/epictetus
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/marcus-aurelius
http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/sellars-stoics

I haven't listened to everything on the Stoics yet, but his stuff on Epicureanism was solid. Very comprehensible and pretty thorough at the same time.

>>3332700
The answer to this isn't really an answer but the taking away of the question. The problem of assigning a meaning to life or finding a meaning to life lies in the asking of an inherently stunted question. Meaning is something that people ascribe to things. These things thereby become symbols and refer to other things in people's minds. For example, the meaning of a stop sign is STOP and refers to the act of stopping your vehicle. The meaning of a stick figure with a skirt on a toilet door is that the toilet is meant for females. These things have meaning by virtue of becoming a symbol that refers to another thing.

Now, life is the totality of everything. In order for life to have meaning, the whole of existence would have to become symbolic. It would have to refer to something. But life being everything, the only thing it can refer to is itself. Thereby not really being symbolic. If the meaning of a chair is the very same chair, it could be said not to have meaning but simply be a chair. Life can only refer to itself which is everything. Therefore life is a symbol for life. Life means life. It is what it is and can't be anything else and can't refer to anything else because it is everything.