[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 64 KB, 736x522, b443e4a989ae0b0fa41bcd8a6d382097c36605c2a513a36fff65bcbf89177063.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20444289 No.20444289[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

.

>> No.20444294
File: 191 KB, 785x1000, 5hy89a.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20444294

t.

>> No.20444302

>>20444289
>morality isn't real
that part is actually true even if egoism is childish and moronic

>> No.20444321

Egoism doesn't preclude love or any such emotions. It only opposes it when it's made into an ideal that's alien to you.

>> No.20444328

>>20444302
Humans aren't real.

>> No.20444334

>>20444289
Based, he's actually right you know.

>> No.20444343

>>20444289
Stirner did not say morality isn't real. He himself said he cherished romantic love. He just cared more about what he loves instead of what you love.
>I can certainly strive for rationality, I can love it, just as I can also love God and every other idea. I can be a philosopher, a lover of wisdom, as I love God. But what I love, what I strive for, is only in my idea, my conception, my thoughts; it is in my heart, in my head, it is in me like the heart, but it is not I, I am not it.
His arguments are not incompatible with morality. Its a rejection of the common morality - a brotherly love. I may love my father, but I don't give a fuck about yours. I love my bicycle, but I don't give a fuck about yours etc.

>> No.20444349

>>20444343
>it is in me like the heart, but it is not I, I am not it.
what does this mean?

>> No.20444353

>>20444289
Try reading the book first

>> No.20444354

>>20444328
Humans haven't been realized for a long time.

>>20444289
Outsourced minds, hearts, obligations... they are false. Experienced reality is the beginning and the end of it all.

>> No.20444369

>>20444354
>Humans haven't been realized for a long time.
No, what we describe as a human is really a social construct that is agreed upon by a particular group. This social construct can vary through time and space, and it is determined by culture and the biases therein. For instance, a rock could be a human. We can't really establish an objective difference between a rock and a human.

>> No.20444375

>>20444294
This. The Stirnerian conclusion is not to embrace self-degeneracy. In fact, the ideal would be steal $200+ worth of USDA Prime Ribeye and eat it or slaughter a farmer's cow without any permission and eat the liver and brain which are the most nutritious parts. Only a spooked retard would decide to eat ice cream, showing instead the ignorance and projection of this memer, they simply are biologically spooked by the reward of pleasure meanwhile the carbohydrates exerts non-socially constructed deleterious effects on the body. As for private property, this is a spook. OP doesn't like the idea of these things being social constructs because it means someone stronger, better looking, and more intelligent can simply take his land and subject him and all his progeny to chattel slavery. Apply Stirner to your daily life, you'll be a billionaire within one year.
>>20444343
The historicity of what he said is immaterial. People can interpret him as they deem fit.

>> No.20444381

>>20444375
>People do what is beneficial to the self
>People should do what is beneficial to the self
or
>People merely actualize their desires
>People should actualize their desires

>> No.20444383

>>20444289
T. Marx

>> No.20444384

>>20444375
are you a billionaire ?

>> No.20444456

>>20444384
Not yet.

>> No.20444558

>>20444375
>In fact, the ideal would be steal $200+ worth of USDA Prime Ribeye and eat it or slaughter a farmer's cow without any permission and eat the liver and brain which are the most nutritious parts.
Irrespective of context? What if I want ice cream? What if eating dead animals makes me feel bad? If I read you correctly with regards to the liver and brain option (as emphasizing self-control and self-cultivation), why not choose the less abrasive and more stable route of cooperation and diplomacy or to secure different food or even (God forbid) pay the $200 for the USDA Prime Ribeye?

>Only a spooked retard would decide to eat ice cream
Why? I vaguely recall Stirner making the kind of point that you're making with regards to avarice possessing someone, but I'm not entirely sure that I'm clear with it. Surely an ideal of self-control and "rational self-interest" has no firmer grounding than the most vulgar, self-destructive hedonism?

>> No.20444576

Stirner is like Nietzsche for midwits

>> No.20444586

>>20444576
And Nietzsche is like Kierkegaard for syphilitic atheists.

>> No.20444592
File: 138 KB, 542x900, friedrich-nietzsche-in-military-uniform-bettmann (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20444592

>>20444586
I dont know about you but becoming an atheist or having to come into contact with syphilis has nothing to do with understanding Nietzsche

>> No.20444601

>>20444592
You're meant to say "And Kierkegaard is just Hamann for Danes."

>> No.20444612

>>20444601
Literally who?

>> No.20444619

>>20444601
And Hamann is just Luther for schizophrenics.

>> No.20444620

>>20444576
Stirner BTFOs Nietzsche. Neet is enslaved to the ideal of the Overman and continues to be a moralist; NOTHING about his philosophy is beyond good and evil.

>> No.20444624

>>20444619
Luther is just St. Paul for autists.

>> No.20444627

>>20444624
St. Paul is literally just Jesus for conmen.

>> No.20444638

>>20444620
>enslaved to the ideal of the overman
The point of the overman is that if the ideal didn't exist, then the only thing valuable is Resignation of life like how Schopenhauer conceived. See >>20444558
only lowly people will care for earthly desires. This is why Stirner is popular among leftists and trannies and he's only another affirmation of their inability to gain power

>> No.20444652

>>20444638
What have I written that marks me as lowly? I've only asked questions and am not in the main sympathetic to Stirner (who is like Nietzsche for midwits, who is like Kierkegaard for syphilitic atheists and so on).

>> No.20444654

>>20444652
>I was le only acting retarded
Okay tranny

>> No.20444663

>>20444654
I find it odd that you're making out that we're fundamentally opposed when my (admittedly implicit) very critique of Stirner is that the ideal of being disabused and nothing more is in effect no ideal at all and that critiquing Nietzsche or anyone else on that basis is trivial at best and juvenile at worst.

>> No.20444677 [DELETED] 

Tranny having a stroke and cant communicate ^