Personally, I would assert that it is patently ridiculous to assert that one is somehow viewing the world with greater clarity by effectively dismissing all knowledge of everything things humans intuitively experience, feel, and understand, but which cannot be quantified, measured, or put into objective terms. It strikes me that the rejection of everything that humanity has effectively built over the course of its time on Earth, while certainly including the rejection of that which may be a negative force on humans, is nonetheless ultimately destructive to the core, as it in addition casts aside all that which has enabled humanity to become cohesive and well-functioning. It is perhaps the case that there is no objective way in which one may show the existence of such things, and it may further be the case that they do in fact not exist external to the subjective views of humanity, but I do not believe that one may discount the very real benefit that they provide when rooted in the human consciousness as an end towards which we ought to strive.GabuEx
But if they are indeed just mere artificial concepts - Stirner would call them "spooks" of the mind, then my freedom is being infringed upon for absolutely no good reason. To Stirner, there is only one justifiable right, and that is might. If I am stronger you, what you have belongs to me if I want it. As he put it,  "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!" As of now, I am being oppressed by these secular concepts. In a way, said concepts allow for people to steal what should be my property.
I cannot help but note that there always seems to be a certain segment of those residing within the realm of philosophy whose main purpose in life seems to be the indefatigable pursuit of an objective justification for being an a-hole.GabuEx
Well Stirner did strain quite a few friendships with his views. I wouldn't go so far to call him an a-hole, because I think that it is important to have people who do push the envelope. Moreover, in my opinion Stirner was correct in two ways. One, he was right that we are all egoists in the sense that we all behave according to our own self-interests, whether we realize it or not, that no one is truly selfless and that selflessness is impossible to achieve - this is something even Engels accepted - and two, that ideology can be blinding and that concepts can very easily rule over individuals. Â
Log in to comment