Marxists are spooked.
Anarchists are spooked.
Republicans are spooked.
Christians are spooked.
All things could be nothing to you.
>>349471
If all things are nothing, what is my property?
>>349488
Anything you acknowledge could become yours.
>>350392
Would if two people acknowledge the same thing as their property? Who is spooked?
>>349471
>posts stirner
>criticises anarchism
go read a fucking book you philistine
>>350402
Neither are wrong. Stirnerism is a perspective. It's like how both people can call themself "I" and it's not incorrect. Another answer would be anything is your property if you can defend it.
>>349471
Are there any good books about how one comes to actually free themselves of spooks?
>>350418
Apparently, you've never read Jünger.
Learn the difference between "anarchist" and "Anarch"
>>350727
Independence from society is a spook.
>>350713
Just meditate
>>350727
except he also believed in a non-hierarchical union of egoists
he is also an anarchist
>>350748
Im asking for books and gudies m8
>>351431
JUST
Also become a nihilist, it makes things easier.
>>351431
>how can I train myself to not be distracted by ideologies that only exist as thoughts in my head
>not meditating
Come on
>>350727
I keep seeing this fellow referenced in regards to Stirner. Who is and what specifically of his should I read that would be relevant?
>>351493
Is recommending a single guide on meditation that insanely difficult
>>350713
I don't think so. If I were to offer some advice I'd go with constant introspection and self-evaluation. Be very keenly aware of what you believe and why you believe it. You don't have to be rid of spooks entirely, you just should try to avoid being possessed by them. It should be you that comes first, and the spook should facilitate that, not hinder it.
>>351522
It's a single anon who shills Jünger everywhere
>>351594
Thanks
>>349471
>Hurrdurr I can mold reality to my ego
Fuck off Stirner.
>>351694
>hasn't read Stirner
>>351694
He doesn't say that.
>>349471
Stirnerfags are the worst readers of philosophy. You guys are LITERALLY too stupid and lazy to read Heidegger.
Too smug and self-absorbed to realize Stirner is itself spooked and your practical use of Stirner in day-to-day life proves Aristotelian teleology is real.
You know the number 1 rebuttal used by Stirnerfags when they get called on their unconscious reification of spooks? Take a guess...
"YOU HAVEN'T READ STIRNER!"
>>350732
Independence is a spook.
The only thing that isn't spooky is my power.
>>352132
That's the number one rebuttal anyone uses in regards to someone disagreeing with a philosopher they enjoy. Fuck, you're doing it right now.
>>352200
Fallible or not, it's still my priority.
>>352200
From where do you derive this conclusion? He says very simply that you as a unique individual are all that you can ever experience, and that the various concepts we place ahead of ourselves are fictions, meaning that it would be absurd to enslave the one thing we'll ever experience to them.
Define "spook"
>>352286
The best definition I could offer would be ideas; concepts external to ourselves that we place power in, but possess no substance or power in and of themselves.
>>352274
Here's a question I have for egoists, and this comes from somebody who can appreciate some stirner.
How can the ego exist if a collective identity doesn't exist? There has to be some opposite to which the ego can be compared, and if the ego actually exists (I think it does), then so must it's opposite. So, whatever is not ego (society or whatever) must also be real and not just a spook, or else the ego is a spook.
Can anybody follow that?
>>349471
Its only fitting that Stirner died young, alone from a fucking fly bite like a bitch
>>352307
>There has to be some opposite to which the ego can be compared
Why does that have to be the case? Not everything possess an opposite.
>So, whatever is not ego (society or whatever) must also be real and not just a spook
No, society is very clearly still just an idea.
>or else the ego is just a spook.
The ego is itself just consciousness and self. It's an idea, but one that's fundamental to our existence and inescapable.
>>352322
I thought the ego was our "self" as lived experience?
>>352303
So stirner was a transendentist, cause the basis of that was being a complete individual and not following the whims of society or institutions based on others beliefs and schools of thought.
>>352365
*transendentalist
>>350756
He would have nothing against forming a heirarchy if it suited oneself.
>>352365
Not exactly. One thing people miss about his works is that a spook is not necessarily invalid for being a spook. What he rails against is enslaving yourself to a spook as though the spook were itself greater than you. He explains it in Stirner's Critics that he wasn't opposed to ideas, just ideas that are held as sacred and untouchable; pursued for a reason that isn't your own.
This was also coupled with the idea that you are the ultimate authority over your life, and should seek to exert that authority as you see fit and your strength allows.
>>350727
i so want to read junger but 30 bucks for a used paper back of eumeswil is hard for this poorfag to justify. justify it to me , anon.
Is 4chan an ideal example of a Union of Egoists?
>>352652
no, it's shit and we would ruin it all if we could.
>>352132
Teleology literally revolves around subjugating yourself to spooks dictated by philosophers.
