I've just picked up a copy of The Ego and His Own by Max Stirner.
Before I embark upon reading it I thought I would try and generate a general Stirner discussion here on /lit/ in order to help motivate and equip me with the necessary tools/mindset requisite for a full understanding and appreciation of this most sensational of meme philosophers.
Some questions:
- To what extent is Stirner just a limper, shallower Nietzsche?
- Why is Stirner so non-canon?
- How did Stirner come to inhabit the same meme-sphere as Thomas Pynchon and DFW on /lit/?
Bump?
no
because marx raped him as far as i know but idk bout that. have´nt read st.max yet.
plus he´s edgy but fun. In the first half of the book he shittalks Feuerbach to an amusing extend.
post some stirners
>>7446207
Stirner is so non canon because he asks the obvious fucking questions that any 10 year old could figure out. The same questions that the entire non philosophy reading public knows. But rather than ignore these questions and proceed in to a 500 book length Hegel-like diatribe to try and get his place in the canon and lecturing post, he just points out the bullshit instead.
>>7446487
>all those spooks
You clearly haven't read him.
>>7446564
moar pls :'D
>get into a heated discussion with a feminist on campus
>"b-b-but, your views are a product of patriarchy, and unconsciously everything you say is in aid of patriarchy, so your claims are invalid"
>"patriarchy is a spook"
>"what?"
>"patriarchy: it's a spook. it doesn't exist."
>"are you implying that my oppression isn't actually real? how are you try and take away my oppression"
>I withdraw a copy of The Ego and His Own from my rucksack and start thumping it wildly
>"SPOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK!"
>feminist walks off in a strut
Stirner is literal anti-SJW repellent.
>>7446579
>Before I embark on reading it...
Just fucking why. Look: first, you read the fucking thing, then you come discuss it. This is why /lit/ is utter trash. Too many know-nothings starting threads about that which they haven't read.
>>7447007
You're a cunt mate.
>>7447007
this. /lit/ is filled with autists who feel the need to make a thread about a book when they purchase or receive a book but never when they've actually read it.
>>7446207
>- To what extent is Stirner just a limper, shallower Nietzsche?
I read a source that claimed Nietzsche's first great crisis in his early twenties was a direct response to reading Stirner.
Can't say anything about the veracity of it.
>>7447027
Nietzsche has from time time been accused of plagiarising Stirner. These rumours brew up every 10-20 years, even though there is no evidence that Neejay has ever read that irrelevant useless charlatan.
Wanting to read Stirner because of others is a spook. You're allowing a spook to make you read it.
Stirner was literally a kek
>>7447258
>implying there is anything wrong with c.uckoldry
>>7446997
autism
>>7447268
this. if you get off on it then you are benefiting from it. You aren't loosing any invisible spook points
>>7446997
unfortunately posted, amigo! refrain next time.
>>7447268
>>7446285
I approve. Posting Stirners accordingly.
>>7447303
takes one to know one m8
>>7447514
>>7447578
>>7447586
>>7447595
>>7447604
1. not at all.
2. defeats the 'point' of philosophy. you can literally say 'spooks' in response to any argument or line of thinking and 99% of the time you will have actually made an irrefutable argument.
3. increasingly relevant and popular in internet age.
Does it get better? I'm on page 103 of 595 and he just keeps trash talking religion and I'm bored of it. I get it, belief in things is spooks, get on with it.
>>7447618
nice spooks
>>7447618
its a philosophical tabula rasa or maybe you're just spooked
>>7446207
>- To what extent is Stirner just a limper, shallower Nietzsche?
not at all, he's a minor hegelian.
>- Why is Stirner so non-canon?
his philosophy is sophist masturbation
>- How did Stirner come to inhabit the same meme-sphere as Thomas Pynchon and DFW on /lit/?
stan the tripfag
I haven't seen a decent refutation of Stirner yet, which should tell you something. Yes, he states the obvious. Something so obvious that 99% of people never even think about it.
He's a practical philosopher. There's great benefit to be had from recognizing spooks all around you and subordinating them to your own self. Far from easy, of course.
Stirner is pretty useless. The Ego and Its Own is just a massive nihilistic rant. It's not interesting. It contains no philosophical insight as it is non-philosophy.
Protip: you are much too impressionable of a reader if a text gains in clout just because /lit/ makes a meme of it.
>>7448378
Yeah but darksouls was good.
Yeah but ITAOTS was good.
Yeah but GOMAD was good.
Yeah but SICK FADES was good.
The most prominent meme of each board has some truth to it. Some seed of progress and growth to spurn anons to grow as people in the hobbies they enjoy.
Forcing one's self to try to read Stirner reminds people that reading is fun and that there are other books to read.
>>7447268
kek
>>7447268
senpai
desu
kek
>>7446207
Who /wittol/ here?
If your women aren't keking you then you aren't living the Stirnerian life.
>>7448386
I think you mean "spur on", but you're right.
Maybe the difference is that other board favorites like video games and records can't have nearly the extent of grave influence as philosophy texts.
I've seen people calling things spooks all around 4chan for about a year or so now. Great, let's just call everything spooks and glorify individualism. That way, we can't really discuss anything with each other.
>>7448386
But 2016 really is the Year of the Linux Desktop. Mark my words...
>>7448378
Stirner is awful. If you think Stirner is saying something interesting it's probably because you are uneducated.
>>7446207
>- To what extent is Stirner just a limper, shallower Nietzsche?
To the same extent that Nietzche is just an obfuscated, rambling and syphilitic Stirner.
>- Why is Stirner so non-canon?
Political philosophy was the big trend at the time (Marx etc) and Egoism pretty much breaks political philosophy in general so he was kept hush hush for a long time. And because he only ever wrote one book and his personal life was generally a huge joke.
>- How did Stirner come to inhabit the same meme-sphere as Thomas Pynchon and DFW on /lit/?
The only known picture of him is that stupid looking smug pencil drawing so it's easy to post exploitable meme faces while greentexting something like ">spooks kek" in response to literally anything on this board.
Every person on here that bashes Stirner either doesn't understand him or thinks that people making a meme out of him somehow devalues his arguments.
1. He says things are spooks that you allow to have control over you. A lot of people take this to mean he is against everything, that everything is a spook that you must throw in the trash. No. You are free to do any damn thing you want, as long as it doesn't harm you. That is the point. Freedom. Freedom to read and discuss and imbibe all sorts of philosophy and literature. Giving it control over you, that is the key here. Subordinating yourself to anything is the only crime, in Stirner's view. That does not mean you can't have fun, can't learn, can't do a lot of things you were already doing.
What he says can be a bit obvious, but it's one of those things that so many people are blind to, or don't fully internalize.
2. People on here who call everything spooky are probably trolls or they don't understand.
3. People bashing Stirner are probably trolls.
but hey it's just banter, right lads?! ;)
>>7447258
stirner was actually a golddigger
someone do hair
>>7448818
I'd avoid using the term freedom and instead the fulfillment of the ego.
I'm a bit rusty though; what's the difference between the Ego and the Creative Nothing?
Which edition is most commonly read?
I was considering getting this one (pic related).
>>7447051
No direct evidence where he wrote in his own handwriting 'I read Stirner' by the way, but all the information we do have it implies that he did.
>>7448882
I like these editions. Cambridge is good.
>>7447258
If by kek you mean took advantage of some bitch to live the /fa/ life with his bros, then yes.
>Stirner planned and financed (with Marie's inheritance) an attempt by some Young Hegelians to own and operate a milk-shop on co-operative principles. This enterprise failed partly because the dairy farmers were suspicious of these well-dressed intellectuals. The milk shop was also so well decorated that most of the potential customers felt too poorly dressed to buy their milk there
Stirner is pretty much the greatest philosopher apart from Derrida.
If you haven't realised philosophy is about trolling (look at Socrates for fuck's sake) by now, you're doing it wrong.
>>7447306
>the trust of your significant other
>"invisible spook points"
>I've just picked up a copy of The Ego and His Own by Max Stirner.
So as a joke, or are you unironically getting meme'd?
>>7449007
I don't see anything wrong with at least trying it out. You can't truly evaluate or criticize a book until you've actually read it.
>>7448818
I'm sorry, but it sounds pretty juvenile. Discarding expectations imposed by others is hardly revolutionary thought or particularly ground-breaking. I bet most of the people here realized something like consumerism wouldn't make them happy in their teens, and that prestige and or fame wouldn't make them feel fulfilled in their mid-twenties.
Am I misunderstanding completely? It just seems banal.
>>7449007
Most people in these thread have more than one copy, step your game up.
>>7448162
Very accurate post
Stan is so autistic and delusional I'm fairly certain most of the Stirner posts to this day are initiated by him...
>>7448162
>he's a minor hegelian.
Clearly you've never read him, or perhaps you took his irony seriously? You realize the absurd "dialectic" methods he employs are a joke at the expense of Hegel, right?
People have a tendency to compare Stirner to Hegel or Marx, contemporaries who, whether you like them or not, were certainly deeper thinkers.
Stirner is a practical man. I read his book in the same way you'd read the Meditations. There is some insight to be had though. It's the allowing of ANYTHING above yourself that needs to be discarded.
When you actually think about your daily life, yourself, you might be surprised at what you subordinate yourself to.
This is obviously going to be banal to some, particularly here, but there are plenty who have something to learn from it.
Just ignore the memes.
>>7448891
What a bunch of hipsters
>>7448882
The only difference is price, although there is a new translation in the works currently happening
>>7451525
bump
>>7449114
I really doubt that most people in this thread have even read the back cover, let alone own a copy.
>>7446997
kringe
What is this memebook?
Ok, is stirner meant to be some sort of /lit/ meme? who is this guy, literally who? I've never heard of him, no one I've read has ever mentioned him.
