What does Sup Forums think about The Ego and Its Own?

What does Sup Forums think about The Ego and Its Own?

I think you're a filthy gambling addict, seeing where you spend your holidays.

I just live here, m8

>cant comprehend private property
its shite

is it on netflix?

It's god tier

Stirner is a spook

As far as I understand it, he argues that private property only exists as understood in relation to the person or entity most able to defend their ownership of it, ie, the State

"I do not step shyly back from your property, but look upon it always as my property, in which I respect nothing. Pray do the like with what you call my property!"

Without this use of might or force, property inherently doesn't hold as a private thing in that it only becomes private through some external force "a spook" and not as an inherent property of said property

Could you tell me what's wrong about this idea or my understanding of it?

hes not incorrect on this subject, but does that mean that every owner of private property should be armed with machine guns and motion senors over the fear of someone mightier coming in and claiming it as their own? If everything is my property, and i just have to go get it, wouldnt that cause constant theft and murder in small scale(steal from store) as well as large scale(claiming land through force) thus resulting in a chaotic society? of course it would, and humanity would never advance. So, while stirner is not wrong, i do admire him, hes a little too anarchic for me.

So it's not that he doesn't comprehend private property, but that the conclusions he draws from his premises is morally or practically impermissible?

So it's not that he doesn't comprehend private property
Private property is simply a claim over something by someone, stirner (altho he knows that) doesnt acknowledge that, which is non sense hence why i used the word 'comprehend',
he may comprehend the idea of private property but not its implications which is why he came up with those conclusions.

>conclusions he draws from his premises is morally or practically impermissible?
yes
inb4 morality is a spook

Also, if humans can be property, can i just rape your sister and take your family as my own slaves through force? I sure can and i will if im allowed, that is, if were living under an self ego driven society.

Egoism isnt bad, people often tell me im a narcissist/egoist. But when you combine it with "everything is a spook" you become a savage.

...

>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.

It's a spook

Automatically trashworthy

Ultra rare

Too spooky for me m8

That being said Stirner had a fitting end to being such a miserable bastard

Die of a simple bug bite

He takes atheism to its logical conclusion and therefore nothing matters

but user, morality IS a spook

and it's that spook that's guarding your property

he doesn't say that you should kill ALL the spooks and actually live in total anarchy and chaos, claiming everything you can and fear the stronger all the time

you're strawmanning really hard here

you should be aware that morality as a spook, a non-tangible, basically not real "being" will be able to guard your property as a spook

it has power over the people who believe/accept them and it has no power over the people, who don't

if someone else conquers your country and then says Canadian private property claims are now void, the glorious conquerors can now claim everything, your spectral apparition will be powerless against the actual physical power


everything he said is from the viewpoint of the ego, a first person viewpoint, while moralists tend to pretend they look down on society from above

Nah borders and nations are spooks. How can Macao be rare if it doesn't exist?

Checkmate flag autists

It ties together a number of disparate threads that run through German Idealism.

As a window into the goings on at meetings of Die Freien, it is invaluable.

Everyone should read it.

THEN tell us what's wrong with it.

you can if you can

and some people might actually want to and will do

all your arguments are basically what the book was against, have you even read it

spook means it's not real, it's not a physical tangible being, if you don't fear it, it has no power over you

morality and laws are upheld by society, so if there's no society there to enforce it, no physical beings to back it up, they are powerless

not realizing this, not being aware this is what's actually really dangerous

nowhere did he say you should strike out as an anarchist and dismantle society. rather than that you should understand society and people to be able to live life as you wish

I never said morality is not a spook, i just inb4'd it. And youre right, ideas hold no power people that dont believe in them, nor they they serve as a guardian against physical force.

What im arguing is that they should for the sake of peace (inb4 peace is a spook lol) for the sake of living in harmony and not having to worry all the time. And accepting the private property spook as well as the moral spook actually set standards that we can all benefit from in our society.

again. Stirner wasn't a practical anarchist. If you want "peace of mind' you can achieve "peace of mind". I don't even know where do you get that he was a revolutionary like Marx.

His anarchy was more about the autarchy of the individual human. Anarchists want to control other people, they want to destroy human associations, societies, they want to elect the spook of total equality over everyone, so no one should be able to benefit from social standing.

I know the concept of spooks... but its these spooks that allow us to build great civilizations. Stirner didnt ask for anarchy or dismantling society but his ideas sure do imply that. Its important to understand why every civilization always creates spooks and that is for control. Im not a fascist or anything but i do believe that SOME laws and SOME moral are essential to a peaceful society. You can argue that everything i say is a spook, and it is, but again, these spooks hold things together.

It comes down to how much were aware of these spooks and how we live by them, because as you said they can be dangerous if we dont realize them. As long as youre aware that something is a spooks (and helps society) then you shouldnt be afraid of the said spook.

i think that all of what stirner's saying is fundamentally true but perhaps, based on what you guys are saying, he misses that there is a system of incentives based on biology that push us to carve out things like private property and act in accordance to laws and such. society can only exist with such spooks, anything else would be anarchy, but the spooks are a natural consequence of tendencies towards peace and order that we already have, and the real motivational-persuasive force in the world is biology

basically this

Stirner wasnt a practical anarchist, he just wants to be left alone and do whatever free of spooks and restrictions. But when someone tries to live by this stirner-ego, he may pose threats to society through his egoist goals.

While i see your point, ''people should just live according to what they believe is right without any spooks''. It's important to realize that we humans live collectively and should work together for peace and innovation. A group of 100% egosit people probably wont work together as well as us now because they will simply claim "muh spook" and go on to pursue their selfish goals.

A Memebook for a Memeage.

>Stirner

first I was like
>spooks
>thou what die will
>Im a crazy bitch nigga

then I was like

>OK, the ride is over
>I wish government will help me with dem programs cause Im kind of stuck
>man, we really need more social justice in this world to help people like myself, (oh btw there are no moral obligation to help me because now moral is bourgeoisie so do it based on muh feels)


Why are "nihilists" so pathetic?

Shitty meme philosopher. Sage.

>Stirner wasnt a practical anarchist, he just wants to be left alone and do whatever free of spooks and restrictions.

...and when the fuel runs out ask government for help and turne the SJW mode on - that is why so many AidsSkrilexx type "nihilists" are passionate about SJWism

...

Calling everything a spook is unproductive and meaningless.

I like Stirner and The Ego and Its Own is interesting, I agree with what he says, but ultimately, you can acknowledge the legitimacy of egoism yet still be haunted by a few spooks.