/lit/ - Literature

>>22388877
Refuted by Tolstoy and Emerson

>>22388877
It's just dumb. The argument is
>Words and arguments are dumb and only brute force truly reigns supreme
Yet he uses words and arguments to prove his point instead of just battering over people he disagrees with a club.

>>22388902
Are not words the might of the mind?
Thus mental might makes mental right, regardless of his preoccupation with the physical world.

>>22388877
Frankly, I don't think most people can handle this book. It shocks the underdeveloped mind. If you are a liberal, it will shock you and make you realize there's a lot of different perspectives that exist and you only really know one. If you are a marxist, you will become very angry, and not be able to properly convey why. If you are a self-proclaimed "right winger", you probably will realize you are actually a liberal. If you have always been intellectually honest, you won't be surprised, you won't learn much, except a quicker and to the point rant about the anti-reality, pearl-clutching world's perspective. Whether someone should read it or not, I don't know. It might actually be too dangerous for a teenager, but especially dangerous for an arrested development, low impulse control, no emotional regulating, barely literate modern "adult" who is probably too retarded to understand what the book is saying. You probably shouldn't read it.
>>22388885
It was pretty much underlined by the use of force though, rather than "disproven."
>>22388902
The real question here is whether you were filtered because you're an idiot or because you went in with the intent to disagree.

>>22389079
>Are not words the might of the mind?
that's a spook
>Thus mental might makes mental right
not only a spook but doesn't make sense according to the book which is physical
>>22388877
stirner did it better

>>22388877
So this book is say that niggers are the real kangz after all?

>>22389089
>Stirner
Stirner is a spook. This dumb faggot, and his followers, retcon everything to fit into their retarded worldview because any criticism is met with the suggestion that it's not actually a real thing and logic is just there to control you. Stirner's egoism is just sophism on steroids.

>>22389096
>>22388877
In all honesty. Yes.
Tyrone Chickensworth has Might which makes him Right over you, chud.
Just accept it!

>>22389102
>This dumb Stirner
Sounds like a really mad LOW IQ ad hominem argument from you, friend. :^)
u mad?

>>22389112
I agree with the guy about Stirner. He was the dumbest out of all of the young hegelians. Pretentious, schizo, narcissistic, and naive he was.

>>22389120
>Pretentious, schizo, narcissistic, and naive
opinion, opinion, opinion, opinion.
Cool opinions :^)

>Frankly, I don't think most people can handle this book. It shocks the underdeveloped mind. If you are a liberal, it will shock you and make you realize there's a lot of different perspectives that exist and you only really know one. If you are a marxist, you will become very angry, and not be able to properly convey why. If you are a self-proclaimed "right winger", you probably will realize you are actually a liberal. If you have always been intellectually honest, you won't be surprised, you won't learn much, except a quicker and to the point rant about the anti-reality, pearl-clutching world's perspective. Whether someone should read it or not, I don't know. It might actually be too dangerous for a teenager, but especially dangerous for an arrested development, low impulse control, no emotional regulating, barely literate modern "adult" who is probably too retarded to understand what the book is saying. You probably shouldn't read it.

>>22389157
lol. tough but fair

>>22389120
Yeah and his responses are pretty much underlining my point. In my experience, Stirner's followers usually grow out of it within a few years. Usually into just realizing that they're just a hedonist that feels the need to justify their hedonism.
>>22389157
Yes. That picture is exactly who I had in mind, in terms of outcome with regards to the influence on teenagers. Unfortunately, considering the implications with the green text, however, you seem to not understand influence and the attributes of the modern man, and so you attribute the edgy-retarded shit to me. Once again, I point to the phrase "barely literate." because It's either that or the basedjak party guys are floating into this board because their site went down.. and they usually have a pretty identifiable trait that you don't have.

>>22389229
>Yes. That picture is exactly who I had in mind, in terms of outcome with regards to the influence on teenagers. Unfortunately, considering the implications with the green text, however, you seem to not understand influence and the attributes of the modern man, and so you attribute the edgy-retarded shit to me. Once again, I point to the phrase "barely literate." because It's either that or the basedjak party guys are floating into this board because their site went down.. and they usually have a pretty identifiable trait that you don't have.

>>22388877
Neither. The average chud and /lit/izen would probably be the ones getting pummeled. It is more novelty literature than anything else, Redbeard felt the need to publish something everyone knows at an inherent level under a pseudonym, it would be like me writing a book called: "Don't stare at the sun" by Blindeye nosight.

>>22389250
>Neither. The average chud and /lit/izen would probably be the ones getting pummeled. It is more novelty literature than anything else, Redbeard felt the need to publish something everyone knows at an inherent level under a pseudonym, it would be like me writing a book called: "Don't stare at the sun" by Blindeye nosight.