/lit/ - Literature

Why then bothering to post?

>

>>2526618
reaction images

I really don't understand the obsession with Stirner. The egoism that he writes about in "The Ego and His Own" is just much of a set of abstractions as Feuerbach's humanism. He uses florid prose to talk about the same thing for upwards of five pages. All that glitters is not gold.

>>2526542
> 2080
> existing

>>2526542
>Being a Stirnerist
>Not caring about others instead of caring about others in order to enrich your own life

You're doing it wrong.

>>2526809
I see your goals are one in the same.

>>2526813
Mah nigga

>>2526807
>The egoism that he writes about in "The Ego and His Own" is just much of a set of abstractions as Feuerbach's humanism.

It really isn't. He strips away abstractions until he arrives at what some would call pure conciousness or something like that, direct experience of the world without the interference of an ideological paradigm, the experience of the self as the creative nothing. It's more reminiscent of something like Zen or Taoism than Feuerbach's humanism. It's just that Stirner stresses the ethical freedom that also comes with this instead of trying to stick to humanist values after the humanism and the human have disappeared.

>>2526817
>egoism
>implying i'm caring about caring
>chomp a big cigar
>die penniless in obscurity after running afoul Marx and Engels
>get plagiarized by Nietzsche
>0 fucks given beyond the grave

I like it!

Also the Tao te ching wasn't written for anyone but sages. The average joe was meant to be left alone.

>>2526840
I like it too, but I need a citation on that latter statement. It's not like there was a dedication scratched in the bamboo, was there?

>>2526845
it emphasizes the difference between sages and the common folk in several aphorisms about political life. citation forthcoming. it's not really democratic in intent since there wasn't much you could call democracy in ancient china. the wisdom in the tao te ching was written as poetry for the intellectual elite, like most texts of its ilk back then. most people couldn't even read.

>>2526845
>Not exalting the gifted prevents quarreling. Not collecting treasures prevents stealing. Not seeing desirable things prevents
confusion of the heart.

>The wise therefore rule by emptying hearts and stuffing bellies, by weakening ambitions And strengthening bones.
If men lack knowledge and desire, then clever people will not try to interfere. If nothing is done, then all will be well.

This isn't as good as the translation I've read, but you get the gist of it.

>implying there is such as a thing as an independent ego
>implying you can experience the world and act without any interference from outside forces and ideas
>implying free will
>ethical egoism
>2012

goddammit /lit/?

>>2526858
I see. I've never interpreted the Tao Te Ching as written for the intellectual elite, but your point about literacy rings true. Still, the work seems in a lot of cases rather against intellectualism or scholarship and seems to mock it.

>>2526871
>implying Stirner claims there is something as an independent ego
>implying Stirner claims you can experience the world and act without any interference from outside forces and ideas
>implying Stirner claims free will
>implying Stirner prescribes ethical egoism

Goddamnit Martin.

>>2526871
>implying we don't experience the ego

>implying that interference's effects are deterministic

>implying Stirner advocated a traditional understanding of ethics

>implying Heidegger wasn't an unapologetic Nazi

>>2526874
It does, but it's often mistaken as some kind of innocent folk wisdom because of the literary form.

>>2526876
>implying Heidegger wasn't an unapologetic Nazi

That he was. He even tried playing true German farmer wobbling around the Black Forest and busying himself with symbolic menial labour and adopting a peasant way of speech. It's pathetic.

>>2526876
>>2526881

>Nazi
>dated a Jew and didn't give a shit
>left all politics after '34 to live in a cabin and had nothing to do with anything

compared to the vast majority of Germans, Heidegger was a fairly subdued nazi. Take your ad hominems elsewhere faggot

>>2526901
SINCE YOU'RE SUCH A HEIDEGGER LOVER would you care to suggest an anon how best to get into his work?

>>2526901
>sold out Husserl
>had his University's staff purged
>issued speeches on behalf of the Nazi party
>became disillusioned with Hitler because he didn't get much influence

He dated a jew because he was an aloof 'apolitical' intellectual. He didn't care about the consequences of his support for the Nazis and it showed.

>>2526901
Nothing wrong with being a nazi
they didn't want or provoke ww2, and they certainly didn't do that fantastical "holocaust" nonsense.

you'll notice as part of the story that they always cremate the bodies and dispose of the ashes so there is no evidence. just take out word for it, you stupid goyim!

>>2526926
children raus

>>2526904
"those in the crossing must in the end know what is mistaken by all urging for intelligibility: that every thinking of being, all philosophy, can never be confirmed by 'facts,' i.e., by beings. Making itself intelligible is suicide for philosophy. Those who idolize 'facts' never notice that their idols only shine in a borrowed light. They are also meant not to notice this; for thereupon they would have to be at a loss and therefore useless. But idolizers and idols are used wherever gods are in flight and so announce their nearness."

Just a quick look at Wikipedia is all you need to know about this clown.

>>2526929
>Making itself intelligible is suicide for philosophy

Holy shit, this is actually what academics actually believe.

>>2526931
Actually, it actually isn't.

Actually.

>Discussing Stirner

Why? It's the type of work you keep to yourself because that's who it's useful too.

"Do I write out of love to men? No, I write because I want to procure for my thoughts an existence in the world; and, even if I foresaw that these thoughts would deprive you of your rest and your peace, even if I saw the bloodiest wars and the fall of many generations springing up from this seed of thought — I would nevertheless scatter it. Do with it what you will and can, that is your affair and does not trouble me. You will perhaps have only trouble, combat, and death from it, very few will draw joy from it."

>>2526931
Outside of the frenchies and their humanities dept sycophants no one gives a shit about Heidegger. Often they're laughed out of the philosophy dept because of their faith in obscurantism, which takes on a gnostic/mystic character except without drugs. Where's the fun in that? There are a lot of those people out there, though.

The Frankfurt school marxists and Analytic philosophers have discredited him wholesale.

>>2526926
>DURR THEY GOT A RAW DEAL WITH THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES THAT JUSTIFIES STARTING A WAR THAT CAUSED THE DEATHS OF MILLIONS HURR
>this is what stormfags actually believe

>>2526946
>Frankfurt school marxists and Analytic philosophers

Some panel of insight...

>>2526953

Yes intelligibility often leads gets us predictable results. Sometimes that's the best those of us with intellectual honesty can do. Heidegger had none.

Sieg means victory. You want heil heidegger for that filename, probably.

>>2526944

I like Stirner but I think this would be a semi-accurate representation of how he viewed his work: http://youtu.be/jLKnCeeAW48

Honesty.

>>2526958
*leads us to predictable results

derp

>finding Heidegger's Borat-style anti-semitism defensible

ishiggydiggy

>>2526944
I can also discuss it merely because it pleases me. Of course, I won't bring it up at a job interview.

Also, that picture isn't Stirner.

>>2526969
How would a hypothetical Stirnerian egoist react to transhumanism?

>>2526952
In what way did the nazi's start WW2 you fucking idiot?

>>2526958
>frankfurt school
>intellectual honesty

>>2526982

Cool question, although I have no idea how to answer it.

>still making the distinction self/other

I hate people but love animals

>>2527076
Kill yourself.

>>2527077
why

>>2527089
He means, 'go get eaten by a bear'
You'd love it. The bear would love it. Win win situation.

>>2527031

>Heidegger
>anything resembling coherent thought
>polysyllabic jargon that would make hegel blush
>Husserl himself said Heidegger did not understand phenomenology
>died a nazi

I'll take the Marxists.

>>2527069

>still caring about the intractable problems of that distinction or lack thereof

>>2527122
postin this from inside a grizzly's stomach as we speak

>>2527209
this ego's going to its own bed

>>2527076
that's cool you can live out in the woods like tarzan

>>2527210
and fuck monkeys for the sake of bringing deseases to humans.

>2012
>not working together as a unit to create a world where everyone's desires and dreams can be accomplished

>>2526982
Interesting question, something I've been mulling over myself. I think that would be a matter of personal choice that isn't necessarily connected to someone's Stirnerism. Stirnerism isn't really prescriptive beyond "hey guys I suggest you don't get fooled by idealism". It would be more of a question of what kind of world a particular individual would want to live in.

I'd say that within the positive outlook on the future of transhumanists, Stirnerists would probably happily cooperate if they wish to become posthuman. An important thing to notice however is that while a Stirnerist may be active within the transhumanist movement for personal reasons, he never really becomes a transhumanist. He doesn't seek to overcome humanity for it's own sake. He merely seeks to overcome his own. If others achieve this state with him that's fine, but it isn't some noble calling of him to free mankind. He never places a goal or ideal above himself, he never becomes a means to an end. He always remains an end to whatever means. There is no sacrifice.

To give another example, in the same way a (working class) Stirnerist may very well vote socialist or be a party member (or even leader) all the while remaining a Stirnerite egoist and never really subscribing to socialist ideals. But he can go along with them as long as they please him.

If this philosophy could be symbolised by an animal it would probably be a fox.

>>2527334
>reading shit out of its context and just considering it literally instead of interpreting its meaning inside the whole conjuncture of its time, and thus being able to see it as an example of a method instead of a doctrine
>2012

>>2527441
>being a dick by changing the file name to obscure knowledge

>>2527443
>being a slow idiot who does not realize it is the same author from the replied post

>>2527444
so sorry! I've not seen many pictures of guy debord.

>>2526542

>MISUNDERSTANDING "EGOIST ANARCHISM".
>ATTEMPTING TO ACT "EDGY" IN AN IMAGEBOARD, BASING THAT ATTITUDE ON YOUR MISUNDERSTANDING OF "EGOIST ANARCHISM".

>>2527466

>>2527466
WHY DO YOU POST THAT SAME AVATAR??
WHY DO YOU USE CAPS??

>>2526542
But Stirner loved his wife.

>>2527466
your posts are humorous and always bring a tidbit of reason into the conversation (most conversations on lit are devoid of logic)

I get anxiety when I have a long captcha ;_;

>>2527495

>he doesn't know the difference between 'avatar' and 'reaction image'.

>>2527504
if it's the same reaction image posted over and over like REI does, it's practically an avatar. Idiot. THINK before you post

>>2527466
Please take notice that egoist anarchism is something that was greatly inspired by Stirner, but that Stirner himself never identified as an anarchist. It's a lable fitting for a lot of his later disciples but not himself.

>implying your ego and sense of mastery is anything but an illusion
>2012

>>2527564
>>2527564

even given those metaphysical frameworks stirner is still successful. one does not need free will or the synthetic "I" (the singular 'self') in order to have some some unnecessary 'spooks' exorcised.
whether i am the one doing the purge, or whether the purge is being done to "me" makes no significant difference...

>>2527564
>implying that's pragmatically relevant

>>2526904
Not that guy.
I recently read "The essence of truth" and "Parmenides".

The first book is actually quite straightforward and easy to understand while the second is a little more difficult to understand but expands on the themes of the first.

>>2526929
I think that passage is to be interpreted with what he means for "mythos" in mind.

I could summarize the whole two books I mentioned in "Truth is essentiality" or "The essence of truth is essentiality itself" but they really sound like empty words if you don't read the books and/or don't know anything about traditional metaphysics.

Not trying to defend him at all cost, just stating my experience.

How about I try to slavage this thread into something.

I got The Ego and His Own, but I haven't looked in it yet, my question is,

How easy is it to read? Is it as easy as Nietzsche or Schopenhauer ? Or is it some Heidegger level shit that I just blew my money on.

>>2527792
There's a lot of people who perceive it as easy, but they tend to simplify it. Same with Nietzsche a lot of the time. I'm not sure if I would suggest other literature first, but take your time with it. Don't get tempted into the whole "Stirner = plain old egoism" thing. There's more to it.

Bemp

>>2527792


No its easy and quite enjoyable. His writing is acidic and derisive, like Nietzsche's...he's a dick and he pulls it off,very a very enjoyable read.

BUMp for more stirner.


Did he ever write anything besides the Ego?

>>2529205
Ummmm a few errand lists. Grain, meats, wine, pick up the dry cleaning, that short of thing.

any comments

>>2529205
A reply to the critics of The Ego and some other essays that matter less.

His oeuvre is very small though, so if you're an admirer of him you might as well read everything.

i'm about to start reading The Ego And Its Own.

Should I take this thread serious?

>>2530197
>taking anything anybody says on /lit/ seriously

>340 b.c.
>not caring about others
>2012
>reading this thread
>mfw

>>2530199
lol /lit/ is so predictable

>>2530197
Only my posts.

someone should replicate that drawing and make an animated adventure series.

>>2530223
ok that's it. im out. fuck this shit.
never coming to lit again. that was too much.

Stax 'Mirner

>>2530223
Psst.
Already done -> >>2529230