What's your honest opinion on Stirner's philosophy? Am about to read Ego and its own. What am I in for?

What's your honest opinion on Stirner's philosophy? Am about to read Ego and its own. What am I in for?

Attached: ap,550x550,12x16,1,transparent,t.u1.png (413x549, 74K)

From what I understand it's pretty lazy. He identifies the world of idea with the ego and just runs with it. That raises problems. Read the World as Will and Idea instead.

MATERIALISTIC, NIHILISTIC, PERVERSE, MORBID, DRIVEL FROM A SPIRITUALLY IMPAIRED INDIVIDUAL.

Stirnerism just re-branded machiavellianism.

Itt: people who havent read stirner

No one here has read Stirner, and that includes you.

probably a much greater and subtler philosophy than you anticipate.

not at all

IT IS BOTH: CURIOUS, AND PATHETIC, THAT MANY «STIRNERISTS» ACUSE ONE OF «NOT HAVING READ STIRNER» WHENEVER ONE SCORNS, AND/OR NEGATIVELY CRITIQUES, THE OBJECT OF THEIR REVERENCE.

>... [ACCUSE] ONE...

First, you ought to read The Unique and it’s Property translation instead. The other one doesn’t fit right. I read it, it’s understandable but no too clear.
Second, it is a wonderful book and must-read for materialists. He’s way ahead of his time in identifying what the then modern world had become and is still today. It’s serious philosophy but he makes it fun with a light sense of humor.

This. These guys ITT are chumps with a spiritualist agenda

Schopenhauer a spiritualist? Really? That's new on me

How are you today :3

No one here reads Schopenhauer, and that includes you

Oh fuck off. The passage about art in The World as Will and Idea is so beautiful it gives me chills. It's one of my favorite books.

>ignoring me
YOU WILL KNOW MY FURY

Didn't we have this same thread 3 days ago?

Attached: 1557099704834.png (900x669, 352K)

You speak/read German?

You lied.

Someone new everyday

I speak and read English, and have read the translation.

I think The Ego and Its Own is worth a read and that's all I've to say about it.

Pretty much all philosophy is, but some of it is better than the rest

I'd argue that the proposition is worth your time takes (or should take) into account that your time is finite and that to say this means it's worth dropping other books for it.

How many books can a man read in a month, really. End to End.

Take a walk lady.

If you go into it understanding that he doesn't mean egoism in any of the senses it's commonly used, but instead something more akin to personal authenticity (compare it to Sartre's notion of radical freedom), you realize that his philosophy is just a call to appraise the world as it relates to you and then be honest with yourself in how you interact with it. Its central message could be said to be 'ideas, as tools exist to be used to your benefit."

>Seminal/influential philosophy>philosophy>everything else

Ego is mistranslation. The main thing he identifies in people is "the unique" which is just a placeholder title for the complete individual as your name is a placeholder title (saying nothing about you while clearly referring to you).

When you make a claim as blatantly idiotic as that it's "materialistic" (Stirner never makes any ontological claims in it) or nihilistic (he never says life is meaningless) or perverse (in what way exactly) or morbid (it's actually quite positive) it becomes clear that you either didn't read it, or read it with such a blatant bias as to wilfully misinterpret it.