/lit/ - Literature

>>23289747
Summarize egoism right fucking now

>>23289772
the prioritization of the ego -the self- and pursuit of self-interest before all else.

>>23289747
Yes. Following one's own egoism is actually the most powerful and freeing thing. Not in the retarded "I control the world lululul, the world is a projection of my mind lulul you are all my objects" kind of way. But the pursuit of the free individual not located to any kind of dogma.

>>23289783
doesn't going to hell if you're wrong refute that?

>>23289792
>hell
you better believe that's a spook

>>23289794
OK, well would you give up eternal life (and instead have your soul annihilated after death) in order to fulfill the desires of your ego during this one life?

>>23289794
Holy fuck so based...

>>23289794
Would you pursue the desires of your ego while adhering to strict objective moral standards?

>>23289798
>eternal life
that's another spook. My consciousness and self was born from physical processes inside of my brain through procreation, when i die my circuits will shut down, and "i" will disappear. There is no other life than the current, not one that i know of anyways.

Only one thing remains true, there is only the self and the spook. A will and a representation.

>>23289805
>objective moral standards
no such thing, that's a spook as well.

>>23289806
>There is no other life than the current, not one that i know of anyways.
ok so you'd rather forfeit the chance at eternal life and have your soul annihilated, I deleted the post because I forgor a few words

>>23289807
If you affirmed moral standards, then you'd have a chance in spite of your ignorance. I hope you one day will try to be a little less rigid in your own faith and dogma.

>>23289811
>chance at eternal life
>soul annihilated
another spook trying to subvert me, not falling for it...

>>23289747
Your text sounds as if you were "against" hierarchies and subservience. But hierarchies are natural and intergral to your psyche, every animal has social hierarchies, it's an effect of evolution. Isn't you being egoistic the same as living according to your individual desires that evolution and nature planted in you? -which entail hierarchies and subservience. I think you are against tyrannical subservience but subservience and hierarchy have a reason for existence, if you imagine yourself out of it you're deluding yourself. You're still in a hierarchy you just chose not to see it. Other than that i agree with you.

>>23289842
>if you imagine yourself out of it you're deluding yourself
i already responded to that in my OP
>that doesn't mean you should become a retard who lacks foresight, it just means that your strings are cut off and you're no longer a wooden boy mr pinnochio, if you choose to partake in any system after that you do it with the knowledge of perks and cons and that's fine, freedom doesn't limit you into being a hermit who throws shit at bystanders it just makes you aware when you're bending the knee so you don't become the work mule of some fat bastard
if i partake in any hierarchy(which i am, unless i live in an isolated environment that no humans inhabit) then i do it while conscious of it. Me personally, i'd choose to evolve/rise above the majority if possible, in a "social Darwinist" kind of way. I don't want to conquer the whole world, but at least i don't want to be someone else's tool.

>>23289842
>But hierarchies are natural and intergral to your psyche, every animal has social hierarchies, it's an effect of evolution.
simply reject being an animal.

>>23289901
>simply reject being an animal.
It's not about whether we classify humans as animals or not. I'm saying we function on the same basis, it's integral to every organism we know, including ourselves. There's no reason to assume our existence would be possible let alone better without (social) hierarchies. I believe it's much more likely that people that don't want to be part of it, justifiy themselves some "higher" existence when they actually flee from reality into short term self serving, self-agrandizing phantasies where they don't have to account for anything. This thinking is not self-serving at all, it's deluded.

>>23289892
I think i pretty much agree with you. I'm interested in what you have to say to this.
you said
>i'd choose to evolve/rise above the majority if possible, in a "social Darwinist" kind of way.
Is rising above not implying you exercise some sort of control on those below you? And they would willingly or unwillingly follow. Who, according to your philoophy should strive away as much as possible from following unwillingly or following another ideal. Is your (or stirners) philosohy just for the few powerful? or if you think it's a universal concept, do you think it's possible to rise in a hierarchy in harmony with the egoism of those below?

>>23289794
I just like the pictures of Stirner. They always make me giggle

>>23290285
ikr
>>23290265
>Is rising above not implying you exercise some sort of control on those below you? And they would willingly or unwillingly follow
that's right. In the world you either control or be controlled. Most likely both to different degrees. I'd rather have the former than the latter.
>Who, according to your philoophy should strive away as much as possible from following unwillingly or following another ideal
95% of people are born slaves by nature, they do not possess any goals or desires for improvement, they are content with having their whole lives unroll in front of them as long as they can cope with 3 mechanisms, the 3 big spooks, the 3 ghosts:
>(1)
Religion:
Most people in the modern day stick to a religion as an alternative path to improving their own lives, it doesn't have to be Abrahamic, but any idea they could follow. The people who bow down 5 times a day, follow rigorous fasting routines and traditions are the same people who lie, cheat and steal every single day. They treat religion as a get-out-of-hell card to get into heaven to justify what they commit during their lives.
>(2)
Education:
Most people, parents, their children, etc... are obsessed with the idea of sending your children to education, they do not care about the course of life that their child will follow, they only care about getting food for the day, conforming to the norms that work against them, send their children to institutions that socialize -and most of the time oversocialize them- because "it's what everyone does!". And it prevents them from setting their own purpose, they're not even cogs in the machine, they're the grease in between.
>(3)
Football:
This is another great spook. During a 90 minute game, you are given a theater that shows you an environment where everyone adheres to the same rules, i.e no matter how strong or weak you are, in sports no one is above the other, unlike in your real life, where you're getting buttfucked daily by politicians while receiving nothing in return. It distracts them from their chains of slavery while giving them a fantasy they look forward to because it's the only fair-sounding thing happening in their lives. Another way of coping with weakness.

------

I'm not this way, i don't want to cope. I just want control over myself, to fight for what i believe in, to prosper. To be free to have control over my actions.
I am dead.
Everything i have has been given to me by someone else, i have never -not even once- been truly alive. I want to evolve because i'm not content with who i am. We must be better than this.
Whether other people follow this philosophy, is their choice, and none of my concern, i will do what i must.

>>23289783
Is this something like Ayn Rand?

>>23290644
i have not read her works. Only those of Max Stirner... Besides, she's a woman.

>>23290350
ok now i disagree with your perspective, i argued in too much good faith
>I am dead.
Everything i have has been given to me by someone else, i have never -not even once- been truly alive. I want to evolve because i'm not content with who i am. We must be better than this..

This part sounds very religious and pessimistic to me. Of course you're a product of your environement and i also find it wrong if people are only that, it's mindwashed and not humane, but that doesn't mean that your true nature has been discarded and replaced before you were born. Your true nature is at play in tandem with your environement, it's not seperate or even against all your social influence. At first i thought you were refering to some interpretation of egoism which i would support that you live out your nature and don't let yourself be subdued by contrary systems even (or especially) if they came under the name of benevolence or "humanism". But you're actually promoting that only a chosen elite can be egoistic and maybe you're even suggesting only they can be the natural leaders while 95% of humans you call slaves. Slaves to be ruled over, not people that should be themselves and like you shouldn't serve unwillingly, no they're worse than you but you don't care what other people do Sounds as if you yourself did only lipservice that - i'm using your words here - you're not a retard that turned sociopathic by egoism.
Also after re-reading i just noticed that you never agreed that you must live in a hierarchy. Your brain is "on hierarchy" even if you're a hermit, you think and you place yourself in hierarchies no matter how abstract other people manifest in your own placement of hierarchies. A hermit is not outside hierarchies, he's a product of hierarchies.

>Whether other people follow this philosophy, is their choice, and none of my concern, i will do what i must

Isn't that the sociopathic interpretation of egoism you try to avoid? You are too engstirnig friend, leave some place in your heart for a pipe smoking hobbit, you don't have to fight to the death and tell yourself that you're dead. There is no caution and wisdom in these extreme statements. Ambition and intelligence is only part of our experience.

>>23290782
yeah.. i believe i made some mistakes...

>>23290839
didn't expect you to admit that! genuinenly positively surprised :) cheers friend, have a nice evening or whatever time it is in your place

>>23290900
you too, i guess

>>23289747
Solipsism can't really be refuted on its own terms, but is nonetheless retarded

>>23289747
Egoism is self-effacing. You should consider two seperate questions when considering morals. First, you should ask what moral system you would accept. The second, you should ask what moral system there should be, meaning, if everyone had the moral system I did, how would I relate to that system? I sumbit the answer to the first question on first glance would be egosim (if it wasn't self-effacing), the second, any non-egoist system.

>>23289747
Solipsis by Dr. Remington J. Prufrock comprehensively dismantles the entire worldview and philosophic influences of Max Stirner.

>>23291133
>but is nonetheless retarded
nice spooks you got going there
>>23291606
>First, you should ask what moral system you would accept
anything that pleases my ego
>what moral system there should be
does not matter. What does matter, however, is how i react to it. Which is the unrelenting pursuit of self-interest
>>23291612
It's most likely just a book filled with spooks. There is nothing but the self and the spook. Give me a summary of its argument.

>>23291628
ok, did you read the rest of the response wherein I say that acting in accordance to your best interests may involve a non-egoist model?

>>23291676
nta but usually selfless acts are done for selfish reasons. being nice feels good. acting in a way that improves society also feels good.
>why did i give the bum money? because i felt bad for him and wanted to do something good (because it feels good)
the only true selfless act would be one where you give up something and gain no satisfaction from it, but usually charity feels good to do.

>>23291738
ok zizek

>>23291612
>>23291628
Kek, the book itself is actually a spook, since I just made it up. No such book as "Solpsis by Dr. Remington J. Prufrock" actually exists lol

>>23289747
This is not worth going to Hell over
>inb4 spook
Its as real as life itself and if you ask God to reveal Himself to you with an honest and open heart, and you dont desist, He will.
Dont fall for this temptation, I can testify from my own experience its not worth it. Keep your eyes in Heaven anon, thats the finish line, our true calling, our Telos. Nothing can substitute it, nothing is worth losing God's company over. I will be praying for you from the bottom of my heart, and I hope you will change your mind and I will get to see you in Heaven one day.
Until then goodbye brother, I'll keep praying for you

>>23291841
>there is only the self and the spook
called it

>>23291843
The mind -ego/self- can make a heaven of hell and a hell of heaven. It's all about how your ego perceives and acts in accordance with the spooks around you.
>Until then goodbye brother, I'll keep praying for you
goodbye then

>>23289747
Stirner is the end of the road, conclude with Zapffe. Bleak nihilism

>>23292005
zapffe was the worst possible failure of a philosopher, he let the words on a page affect his life choices. He ended his bloodline and lived in suffering over pure bullshit

>>23289783
>prioritization of the ego -the self- and pursuit of self-interest before all else

so it advocates for adults to act like 3 year old kids? lame

>>23289747
Its immoral

>>23292611
Does a 3 year old really have a well developed sense of self? Without a doubt a three year old acts without constraint, but a three year old can't articulate or understand his own desires in any real way.

>>23289794
Dale from KOTH looking mf

>>23289807
Then there is no grounds upon which any argument including yours can be made. Since you obviously don't believe this, you are now simply lying.

>>23292638
>but a three year old can't articulate or understand his own desires in any real way

sad lonely childless hands typed this. a 3 year old knows exactly what he wants and articulates it in precise and succinct language. they are much more confident and adamant in their wants and desires than adults

>>23289747
No, the reason I dislike Stirner is actually my same problem with libertarians, communists, etc, which is really just the claim of every teenage anarchist and antifa queer: The claim that because I am not a communist/egoist/anarchist, following your deranged, made up, wholly invented and inaccurate view of the world which has zero predictive power and no track record whatsoever of accomplishing anything, ever, except getting people killed, I am a cuckold for someone else.

This is a very bad way to convince people to do things, but me in particular, because I'm not retarded. I understand that hierarchies are largely matters of interpretation. Different people perceive the dominance hierarchies in which they reside differently. Everyone thinks that they are either in charge, or vital, or in some way an aggrieved party. And I cannot help but notice that this is the position you yourselves always take.

I am the aggrieved party. I am a cuckold for Jews or Capitalists or White People or whatever it is this week.
The Jews/Capitalists/White People are in Charge, they are fucking my wife.
You are vital! Thank you wise Egoist for explaining that the church I go to is actually a broad conspiracy to get me to not eat meat on fridays because the pope has the eel market cornered.

So really you're just doing the exact same thing everyone else is and I know you're not smart or you'd have noticed this, so you don't have better insight than I do. If I were a egoist, I would have to stop, since it's obviously a trick you have come up with to make me a deracinated retard victim. I'd much rather I be the chad, and YOU be the wojack thank you very much.

>>23289807
Read Carl Jung and learn about ancient images under your consciousness.
Hierarchy is a natural part of humans, you dont have to take part in it, but you cant change it, and if you cant change something, you need to live with it.

>>23292646
>they are much more confident and adamant in their wants and desires than adults
The toddler does not have the capacity yet to understand or introspect about his wants, nor to create a sophisticated abstract goal the way a grown adult can
Absolutely toddlers are egotistical little pricks, as they haven't yet learned to hide their desires or conform to etiquette.
An adult is no less egotistic but just has more developed wants and desires, as with maturation delaying gratification for a long term goal becomes easier

>>23289747
Stirner likely never existed, and thus, is a spook. qed.

yeah that's a certified milky stirnerpill banger, op. can picture the christ tards fuming itt, didnt read anything expect the op and posting this and closing the thread after that

>>23292662
Chatgpt pls go

>>23292662
>This is a very bad way to convince people to do things
lmfao, when did i ever try to convince you to do things? by all means, stay spooked.

>>23289747
Egoism doesn't bar you from partaking in organizations. Stirner himself argued for the Union of Egoists. It's alright to live in a state as long as you oppose any transgression and upset the system. Just don't be a schmuck and go for your own gay little revolution.
>>23289772
Instead of the tautology provided by the OP egoism also means realizing what your own self is. Everyone is always acting in their own interest. We have that right now. Stirner's egoism rids yourself of emerging concepts that interfere with that.

>>23292611
Adults shouldn't act like 3 year olds? Sounds like yet another spook to me.

>>23292662
OP just doesn't understand Stirner. Stirner's response to you would probably be something like advancement being a spook. Why does society need to advance and what is in it for me? Stirner wrote this book around the time of the German revolution. You can't view his original takes from the modern perspective without thinking for yourself.
Still, there are two things which still hold up rather well. I believe that modern spooks keep the suffering going. Despite technological advancements I do not think that people are happier. The idea of capitalism doesn't bring you joy. You are in a nihilistic system without even being aware of it and some people tend to realize this bit by bit.
Secondly, Stirner's definition of liberty is acutall pretty neat. He considers liberty as something to be taking instead of being granted. The reason for that is that granted liberty always come with its own tacid restrictions that limit your own thinking. Freedom of press is a good example which is very relevant today.

>>23292662
get off chatgpt and learn to write retard

>>23289805
What you may call moral standards I do purely out of self interest.
Helping out my brother in time of need? Egoism, a strong family unit survives and you can rely on their help.
Helping grandma cross the road? Fuck that I ain't paying more money for old shits who couldn't establish their own supportive tribe (e.g. a family) and need assistance from state institutions.

Loving my wife and buying her presents? Egoism, the happier she is, the more care I can expect, the less work I need to do.

There comes a point where the group that expects help in the name of morals becomes too large to sustain. Leeches benefit from these systems of morals, thats why helping a random homeless or foreigner is unacceptable, you don't gain anything, you bring down the quality of your environment.
Those leeches are not truly egoists, they are malicious retards who can't think in relative terms and hypotheticals.

>>23296262
Based based based

>>23295891
I'm not sure I totally agree with everything you say anon, but I like you, and what you say about his theory of liberty at the very least.

>>23289747
Others following egoism is counterproductive for my egoism, I need them to keep believing in spooks