Max Stirner, pseudonym of Johann Caspar Schmidt (Bayreuth, October 25, 1806 - Berlin, June 26, 1856) was a German philosopher.
...
a transcendence of the subjugation of consciousness to abstract ideas such as "the state" and "humanity". Stirner simply assumes that his state of consciousness can no longer be connected to abstract concepts such as "the state", "the people", "man" etc.
Since this "unique ego" is beyond the limits of the definable (it falls outside the dialectic) it is therefore also completely indefinable. The absolute is thus linked to pure subjectivity, and therefore escapes any subjectivation.
In other words, humanism is a curse rather than a blessing, as it imposes limits on the “human.”
Ich hab' mein' Sach' auf Nichts gestellt (Goethe). This phrase indicates what both Stirner and Hegel regard as the fundamental nature of pure subjectivity.
Stirner plainly stated that there is no difference between humanism and Christianity, but that "humanism", on the contrary, entails an intensification of the oppressive mechanism of Christianity.
He seriously problematizes the alleged evidence that man has simply become "freer" or has started to act more "morally" since the Enlightenment.
An interesting fact is that Stirner did not preach "revolution" at all, but what he called Empörung: the individual man had to come to the insight that he was faced with the choice to realize his own individuality on the basis of daily practice and not to let seduced by all kinds of sacred goals outside themselves. The resistance and oppression that the individual person may experience must be circumvented through a cunning strategy. According to him, striving to realize a new form of society inevitably leads to a new essentialism and is itself the product of this.
In fact, Stirner's relevance is limited to his own time. His alleged modern-day apostles sometimes lack irony. Stirner can be understood as a "tool" to disassemble contemporary developments, and in particular to formulate a critique of the communalism of the "alter-globalist movement".
Rudolf Steiner: "Like Nietzsche, Stirner often believes that the driving forces of human life can only be found in the separate, real individual. He rejects all forces that seek to shape and determine the individual personality from outside. The free human being determines his own goals. He possesses his own ideals and does not allow himself to be possessed by those ideals. The human being who is not master of his own ideals as a free individual is under the same influence as the mentally ill individual who It makes no difference to Stirner whether a human being imagines himself to be the “Emperor of China,” or whether an ordinary citizen imagines that his destiny is to be a good Christian, a faithful Protestant, a virtuous human orphans, etc., or that he is taken captive, and sits, in orthodoxy, virtue, etc.
You only have to read a few pages in Stirner's book, Der Einzige und sein Eigentum, to see how closely his views are related to those of Nietzsche."
John Glassford (prof. present): "Could it be more than a coincidence that Stirner, like Nietzsche, abhorred the state, nationalism, liberalism, socialism and communism? Nietzsche called all those modern isms “fits of stupidity" and Stirner said quite remarkable about one of those ideologies, “that the communists see the man, the brother in you, is only the Sunday side of communism.” According to Stirner and Nietzsche, these ideas are all based on a latent, secularized version of Christian ethics.
ImplicationOverReason 0 points 6 months ago
a) ABSTRACT (Latin abstraho) - "to draw from or separate". Being implies separate (perception) while drawing from whole (perceivable)...the suggestions by others tempt one to ignore that.
b) ones consent to suggested theism (the) tempts one to ignore that STATE, noun (Latin, to stand, to be fixed) contradicts being (life) within motion (inception towards death). The suggested becomes the "static statistic" ones consent holds onto, while ignoring that everything perceivable moves.
c) HU'MAN, adjective (Latin humanus; Heb. form, species) implies within AN'IMAL, noun (Latin anima, air, breath, soul) aka flow (inception towards death) animating form (life)...once again are suggested definitions (definite; affixed) utilized to tempt ones consent to hold onto them.
Consciousness implies awareness of partial (perception) within whole (perceivable), hence a differentiation of whole (inception towards death) into partials (life) aka a setting free (will of choice)...not a connecting together. Others suggest collectivism to tempt ones together aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one) or tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together).
Ones consent to suggested establishes the suggested definitions as abstracts within ones mind/memory. It's on oneself to discern that memory can be used like a hard-drive (want to hold onto) or like a ram (need to let go)...depending on ones free will of choice. Others exploit ones lack of self discernment by tempting one to willingly hold onto suggested information, while ignoring the need to adapt to and let go of perceivable inspiration.
One cannot hold onto inspiration.
a) unique implies whole (motion) differentiating itself through momentum (balance) into partials (choices)...others tempt one with suggested definitions to ignore the momentum of motion.
In other words...suggested words (affixed) tempt one to ignore perceivable sound (moving). Adapting to sound implies being a phonetician (from phonic; sound), while ones consent to a suggested def-inition implies being a deaf phonetician. Ones consent to suggested words permits others to utilize spell-craft aka crafting ones spelling with suggested information.
b) balance (need/want) implies limit for ones free will of choice. FREE (implies within dominance of balance) WILL (aka want implies within need) OF (implies out of,hence being within) CHOICE (implies within balance).
Ones consent to suggested dialectic tempts one to ignore being (life) within outside fall (inception towards death) aka being temporary growth within ongoing loss.
Each partial (perception) is subjected to absolute whole (perceivable). Ones consent to suggested the-ism "links" one to a chosen one aka to the one suggesting it.
a) curse (suggested information) or blessing (perceivable inspiration)...it's ones free will of choice.
b) -ist (humanist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (humanism)...while ignoring perceivable.
c) human implies hue (color) of man, in-between spectrum of white (pure light) and black (absence of light). Spectrum implies specification aka special aka different from one another aka partial aka apart from one another aka visible form.
One cannot perceive sameness; only moving differences aka perceivable inspiration. Others suggest equality (same) through diversity (different) as the inversion thereof.
a) that implies ones consent to suggested nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing), while ignoring perceivable transmutation (partials within whole aka each one thing within everything).
b) notice the struggle of a child to find balance when starting to walk...that implies choosing to adapt to perceivable balance aka form adapting to momentum of flow. "gestellt; stellen" (to put) tempts one to ignore that only flow (inception towards death) puts form (life).
Everything puts each one...other ones suggest nothing as the inversion thereof... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQnaRtNMGMI&themeRefresh=1
A subject can never be pure, since it's being subjected within an objectifying origin...flow (loss) objectifies form (growth); while form (life) is being subjected to flow (inception towards death).
Impure within pure aka temporary chaos (life) within ongoing natural order (inception towards death) aka living within the process of dying, hence ones struggle for sustenance of self.
If there; then here...a differentiation of position.
Ones consent to suggested -ism represses self, while permitting others to oppress one with the suggested. Consent implies ones subjection to be burdened by another.
Meanwhile in reality...nature impresses itself (inception towards death), while forcing adaptation (life)...loss forces growth; velocity forces resistance; balance forces choice; whole forces partial; surrounding forces center etc.
Sleight of hand: "Express yourself; don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry...it's human nature".
Free will of choice implies "reaction" aka re-sponding to be enacted upon. Choice implies ones response-ability...enabled through balance (momentum of motion).
Aka indignation implies shirking ones response-ability (choice) onto another, while burdening self with anger; wrath; contempt...Empörung.
Aka he ignored being choice within balance (need/want), while facing suggested choices within conflicts of imbalance (want vs not want). Those conflicts are called "reason".
Being implies resistance (growth) within temptation (loss) and choosing to resist (need) temptation (want) grows ones resistance. Ignoring need for want by consenting to suggestions of others, permits others to erect (growth) self; while cutting off all those who ignore resisting from their circumference...aka circumcision.
Only a separate can discern self to be within whole. Being (life) moved (inception towards death) allows self discernment about who; where; what and why? Anything suggested by another tempts one to ignore SELF discernment.
Suggested individualism tempts ONE to consent to TWO (dual), while ignoring self as partial (ones) within whole (oneness).
Sleight of hand: "all for one and one for all" aka "there can be only one" aka "alone"...ALL(in)ONE.
STUPID aka stupor aka stop - "cessation of motion". Ones consent to any suggested -ism "fits" it as an affixed definitions within ones moving memory, hence tempting one to hold onto a fictitious contradiction of reality.
The many ignore flow of inspiration (sound), while getting hooked by the few to formed information (words).