The Philosophy Of Max Stirner Explained
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ธ.ค. 2021
- In this video we will explain the key ideas from Max Stirner's book called 'The ego and its own'. Stirner’s philosophy is usually called “Egoism”. He claims that the egoist is someone who rejects the pursuit of being a devotee to "a great idea, a good cause, a doctrine, a system, a lofty calling" and that the egoist has no political position. He claims that the egoists “live themselves out” and do not care about how “well or ill humanity may fare thereby”.
According to Stirner, humans are driven by egoism in the sense that they are self-interested. He finds that we, as individuals, should act in the ways we see fit without any sort of restriction. Stirner says “I am everything to myself and I do everything on my account”.
Egoism rejects all forms of constraints and these constraints include the state, social conventions, laws, moral codes and religion. Even these actions that we think are beneficial to others or as selfless acts are seen as having a selfish motive. Sure, egoism can accept these selfless acts because it could say that such behaviour benefits an individual’s self-image.
Things such as the notion of the state, property as a right, natural rights, and the notion of society are just “spooks” in our minds according to Stirner.
According to Max Stirner, in his book, ‘The ego and its own, there are three stages of the human experience or three stages of the individual life. These three stages are made up of the realism, idealism and egoism stages. So he begins the first part of the egoism and its own with a dialectical structure based on individual stages of life which are the childhood, youth and adulthood stages.
The first stage is the realistic stage of childhood. Children are constrained or limited to material and natural forces such as their parents in this stage. Freedom from such constraints will be achieved with what Stirner calls the self-discovery of the mind. As children discover and explore ways to get across these limits, they become more determined and cunninger.
Next comes the idealistic stage of youth and along with it comes new internal sources of constraints or limits because the individual becomes enslaved once again. What do they become enslaved to? They become enslaved to the spiritual forces of conscience and reason.
When adulthood comes along then so does a more developed egoism arise. Individuals can then escape the material and spiritual limits and learn to value their satisfaction above anything else.
Stirner sees this dialectic of individual growth as similar to historical development.
Unbelievably based
Can you explain me why? I am new to philosophy
@@akhandraj1189 It's not based it's cringe and being-a-woman pilled
@@trabant3060your response is cringe
@@DM-zl4ln so is egoism.
@@trabant3060what’s your idea of based then? Michael Knowles?
Thank you!
Good simple breakdown ty.
My favourite Philosopher
Stirner would hate to be called a philosopher.
I don't think he'd care honestly
Your opinions are spooks!
Very good. I love This vídeo. A Kiss from Brazil!!!!!
Nice brief resume of stirner's philosophy. I'm reading ego and its own and this video help me comprehend much better what so far I have read.
Very informative video 👍
Hi, his stages of life weren't meant to be taken literally. Like the rest of the first half of his book he was mocking Hegalian dialectics.
Would love to know more. Do you mean that the parts where he talks about the stages of human life and also about the historical development in a dialectical structure was just mockery of Hegelian Dialectics?
@@p3philosophypsychologyandp493
I'm getting my opinion from Wolfi Landstreicher's introduction of his new translation
"I recently read a pamphlet in which one of the writers assumes that the section in The Unique entitled “A Human Life” expresses Stirner’s view of how individuals develop. But in the very title of this section, Stirner gave us a heavy-handed hint that this is not his viewpoint, that it is part of the joke. Though Stirner’s mockery is an attack on all fixed ideas, on all ideals placed above each unique being and his self-enjoyment, its central attack is on the humanism that Feuerbach, Bruno and Edgar Bauer (and the other “critical critics”), and the various liberals and radicals of the time, put forward as the replacement for christianity and theism. When Stirner speaks of a “human life,” he is not talking about his life, your life, my life, or the life of “humanity” in general (since for Stirner, “humanity” itself is a mere phantasm-as he explicitly says more than once). He is telling the reader who gets the joke that he is presenting a caricatured, mocking perspective of how his opponents view human development, with the intent of twisting it against them."
I disagree, it could be taken both literally and non-literally. If he was mocking Hegelian dialectic, then the Hegelian loses. If he was not mocking the Hegelian dialectic, the Hegelian still loses. So no matter what position one takes, the conclusion remains the same.
Excellent
Yo! Thanks! 😊
Great video, thank you!
That rendering of him you used for he cideo is absolutely amazing, that smirk is like a scar on reality.
No mention of Stirner's union of egoists?
Wait..so this isn’t where I can finally talk about fight club? Is this place in itself not a spook if I can’t talk about fight club? I have more questions than answers now 😢
Considering how he says the self is something that cannot be conceptualized. That's certainly consistent with our inability to define the self but is it accurate? Or just seems accurate because we haven't created a standard cognitive mapping?
If we make a perfect map of the human brain and it's functions we will lose the concept of self trough its complete understanding. The more we learn about the human body the more of it becomes "mine" and less of it remains "me".
VERIDIQUE PUISQUE L'HUMAIN EST UNE ERREUR DE LA NATURE .
CoMMENT AVOIR LA VIDEO. TRADUITE EN FRANÇAIS. ?????
Stirner should join the animal world where all his ideals can be realised. That is, if he is not devoured by other animals first.
The unique and my own l unique et ma propriété i im myself
👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻👻
No wonder why in a Catholic country as Mexico professors at College don't even mention him.
Good video until you disrespected the first two rules of fight club.
Oops what have I done? 😱
Stirner claimed that workers experienced social alienation in publication a year before his critic Marx.
If the Egoist (coined by Engles) is legitimate and separate from all outside systems he cannot experience alienation; because alienation from one’s work is based on a social relationship to the alienating conditions of production. In Stirner’s view, the means of production is of no concern outside of the mind. In this vein how could stirner understand alienation? In what logically more sound sense are separate relations mere abstractions?
Egoism is a spook
BOOOO!