/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.5293065]

Can someone tell me what the deal is with "spooks" and stirner?

[Anonymous No.5293071]

>>5293065
use your favorite search engine, use the archive, fuck off

[Anonymous No.5293304]

"Spooks" are a type of beings in Stirner's haunto-metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.5293309]

>>5293065
skellingtons

[Anonymous No.5293420]

>>5293065
I cannot.

It's far 2spooky4me

[Anonymous No.5293579]

>>5293065
A way to disregard, dismiss, devalue, and demerit things he disagrees with in his shit philosophy. There I said it.

[Anonymous No.5293597]

>>5293065
Why are you so dumb OP?

[Anonymous No.5293616]

>>5293579
Pretty much this.

Stirner was a contrarian faggot, as are all of his followers.

[Anonymous No.5293619]

could someone please explain to me why being 'spooked' is bad?

[Anonymous No.5293705]

>>5293065
Stirner essentially takes materialism to its logic end and denies all metaphysical concepts instead of merely obvious ones like God which had been the mainstay of materialists before that. He advocates a lifestyle free of all metaphysical concepts - religion, morality, ideology etc. One should live for self-enjoyment. This is in the historical context of 1840s Prussia in which culture and philosophy had convinced the masses that their slavelike lifestyle was desirable, that one should live for society and state instead of themselves. Hegelianism was the leading philosophical school, which advocated Christian mysticism, idealism and other stuff Stirner saw as mere ways to convince people to oppress themselves based on metaphysics.

His union of Egoists had a rule that all of its members should gain something from the club if they were to be a member of it. This is the cornerstone of his philosophy: we should not settle for less than more.

[Anonymous No.5293715]

>>5293071
>Tries to shun the thread by telling OP to fuck off
>OP still gets answers from others
Better luck next time

[Anonymous No.5293850]

>>5293705
>denies all metaphysical concepts
>One should live for self-enjoyment
>One
>self

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5293895]

>>5293579
>A way to disregard, dismiss, devalue, and demerit things that don't exist except in our minds.
>>5293616
No.

>>5293850
Oneself is a reality.

[Anonymous No.5293927]

>>5293895
>Oneself is a reality.
>reality

Oneself has no unity, it is a multiplicity. Drop Stirner, pick up Nietzsche.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5293994]

>>5293927
Multiplicity negates reality now, does it?
Yes, I'll get around to him.
Philosophy is just a bad habit I've picked up from you people anyway.

[Anonymous No.5294080]

>>5293994
>Multiplicity negates reality now, does it?
Yes, if you take anything real to have only a single meaning or sense.

[Anonymous No.5294090]

>>5293065
Spooks are societal expectations, more or less. Its a criticism of moral rights and wrongs being nothing but a ghost, a "spook".

[Anonymous No.5294091]

>>5293850
>derrida literally voted shittiest philosopher ever after Ayn Rand

[Anonymous No.5294105]

>>5294091
Derrida will be 20th century's most important philosopher along with Deleuze and Heidegger.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5294110]

>>5294080
So multiplicity is a part of metaphysics?

[Anonymous No.5294122]

>>5294110
I don't think we can escape metaphysics as such. However, multiplicity, combined with various other stuff like a critique of presence, identity, representation, etc., is at the exit of traditional western metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.5294263]

>>5293895
>Oneself is a reality.

[Anonymous No.5294278]

>>5293065
Could you quote the part of The Ego and Its Own that you have trouble understanding, OP? That way we could help you in a more precise way.

[Anonymous No.5294321]

>>5294278
oh you!

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5294383]

>>5294122
>Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world that encompasses it,[1] although the term is not easily defined.[2] Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms:[3]

>What is ultimately there?
>What is it like?
The term sounds like it should only refer to the imagined, all your thoughts, that kind of thing. This is the way I was using it.

>>5294263
>I am not real

Selves sure are real.

[Anonymous No.5294459]

>>5294383
>The term sounds like it should only refer to the imagined, all your thoughts, that kind of thing. This is the way I was using it.
Well the thing is, we can't escape interpretation. And strictly speaking there's nothing to escape to, no reality "out there", like Kant thought - this was based on a prejudiced decision for a fundamental subject. You can take any concept you want and you can't experience it in an immediate way because our experience is always mediated through existing interpretations, traces of past experiences and possibilities of new. Now you have, IMO, two choices: you can try to make a strong critique of existing concepts and thus clearing a way for a new metaphysics (pick Derrida) or you can start creating new metaphysics right away (pick Deleuze). You can pick both and mix them up too.

[Anonymous No.5295482]

>>5294091
>>5294105

Many semioticians were in some kind of dispute with the deconstructionists. Umberto Eco always defended sanity so he thought Derrida was saying a lot of stupid rubbish.

I haven't read Derrida, though.

[Anonymous No.5295558]

When I saw the filename of your image I went HEE HEE HEE and my cat woke up

[Anonymous No.5295563]

>>5295558
That reply was meant fo r >>5294321

old ma

[Anonymous No.5295570]

>>5293705
Stirner does say you "should" live for self-enjoyment. He is a psychological egoist, not an ethical egoist.

[Anonymous No.5295575]

>living for anything but personal gain
>being this much of an incessant spooky faggot

[Anonymous No.5295601]

>>5295575
>personal gain not a spook itself
faggot detected

[Anonymous No.5295610]

>>5295601
>spook ain't spook

the ride never ends

[Anonymous No.5295611]

>>5295601
Personal gain is. Pleasure isn't.

[Anonymous No.5295617]

>>5295611
pleasure is the ultimate spook
ascetic spookless masterrace

[Anonymous No.5295642]

>>5295617
Sure pleasure is real. It's chemicals in our brain. Chemicals are real.

[Anonymous No.5295652]

A ghost, a spy, and a black person walk into a bar...

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5295660]

>>5295575
>Evil Stiner
Remove your mask, Ayn. We know it's you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaCLWt0EVUM

[Anonymous No.5295662]

Stirner is the only worthwhile anarchist

[Anonymous No.5295704]

>>5295662
He's more of a might makes rightist

[Anonymous No.5295712]

>>5295704
Since he doesn't believe in right, that's entirely wrong. Whereas he does think that legitimacy of the state is entirely built on spooks, and contrasts that with accomplishing everything through purely voluntary unions.

[Anonymous No.5296809]

>>5295482
Derrida is much smarter then the vast majority of people who claim to take after his ideas. Most of 'Post Modernism' is utter bullshit, this doesn't apply to the ideas that it's advocates claim form it's foundation (or lack thereof).

[Anonymous No.5296832]

>>5293065
You know how people on 4chan use memes as a way to deflect from an argument due to a lack of knowledge, or the fact that they simply don' agree, but they have zero evidence for an argument against it?

That's what dumb ass philosophers do. Stirner just called them Spooks. People here like Stirner because it allows them to justify their pathetic life. Like how some people turn to religion, others are even more retarded and turn to philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5296868]

>>5295704
The people who feel a need to argue for "might makes right" are invariably losers and cry babies.
If you had the might, you'd have been right, and there'd be no reason to be writing books about how your white race is so superior to the people who've overrun it.

>>5293065
Stirner just asked for a little more honesty from people, that's all. Everyone does what they do for their own amusement, and Stirner just asks that you admit that.

An easy example, you're driving your preggers wife to the hospital. She's about to give birth, but the speed limit around here is 25 mph. Will you:

(a) gun it, because fuck the consequences, we need to go, or
(b) obey the 25 mph speed limit because it is the LAW and you have to follow the LAW

Basically, if you'd ever consider violating something because someone you cared about was in trouble, then that something isn't so important. It is a spook. If you'd drop something in order to save your own life, then you were only carrying it for your amusement. It is a spook.

The word "spook" comes from Stirner's grandma who used to believe in all kinds of crazy superstitions and Stirner's family put up with it.

[Anonymous No.5296882]

>>5296832
Irony, you are a harsh mistress. You take this man's hypocritical words and twist them back upon himself, impaling him just as he opens his mouth.

Care to actually present some evidence for your post, or ... nah, just stick with the "We hate Stirner" Contrarian Meme. Sure, why not?

[Anonymous No.5297003]

>>5296882
I don't like Stirner for exactly what I said, you ignorant cunt.
That was my argument.

Fucking retards, all of you.

[Anonymous No.5297105]

>>5293065

[Anonymous No.5297658]

>>5296832
>People here like Stirner because it allows them to justify their pathetic life.

But Stirner demonstrates how the standards upon which you base whether someone is pathetic or not (conformity) are nonsense. So there's nothing left to justify.

[Anonymous No.5297669]

>>5297658
>arguing semantics of philosophy based on only arguing semantics that agree with it

This is why philosophy is useless.

[Anonymous No.5297696]

>>5295642
Guess what?! Love is chemicals in our brain too! So is empathy! So is Justice! So is God! So is "chemicals"! So is this post!

But you know what? Those chemicals are made up of ATOMS. You know what those ATOMS are made up of? Tiny particles that behave in very strange ways. But what are those particles made up of? Where does BEING come from? Where does the complexity become irreducible? How does something come from nothing?

[Anonymous No.5297704]

>>5297669
Oh fuck arrow's awake

[Anonymous No.5297705]

>>5293895
>Oneself is a reality.
This chick.

[Anonymous No.5297707]

>>5293619
it gives you a fright

[Anonymous No.5297725]

>>5297704
>well he is right
>better deflect with a meme

[Anonymous No.5297730]

>>5297725
I don't engage her with legitimate replies, and neither should you.

[Anonymous No.5297759]

>>5297730
Why not? Why do you fear the debate against someone smarter than you? Are you afraid you might learn something?

[Anonymous No.5297763]

>>5297669
And so is everything else as a result.

[Anonymous No.5297777]

>>5297759
Oh no the fuck you didn't. You better watch what you fuckin' say. I'm going to go grab my deerstalker, my pipe, and my copy of Aristotle's Rhetoric right NOW. I'll show you who is afraid, you petulant ninny.

[Anonymous No.5298166]

>>5293927
But I already am a Übermensch.

[Anonymous No.5298444]

>>5293071
so did someone decide to just check this out, brings some orange juice, think oh wait let's take a picture and puts their juice in the pic

[Anonymous No.5298451]

>>5297696
that shitpost got real real fast

[Anonymous No.5298465]

>>5297105
Wow this is fantastic.

[Anonymous No.5298468]

>>5298444
that's a candle you fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.5298471]

>>5297696
Only the concept of justice and God exist as chemicals in your brain. Obviously the concept of justice and justice itself are completely different things. Pleasure itself exists as chemicals. That's the difference.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5298642]

>>5297696
>Guess what?! Love is chemicals in our brain too! So is empathy!
Yup yup, with you...
>So is Justice! So is God!
HOLD YOUR HORSES THERE PARDNER
>Where does BEING come from? Where does the complexity become irreducible? How does something come from nothing?
You mean to ask, how do you come from the something of the universe. Pictured, third panel.

[Anonymous No.5298936]

>>5298465

Welcome to Based Stirner.

The end of philosophy.