I think part of why he became so well known is that his depiction in the iconic drawings making him look like someone who thinks he's above everyone and everything, then you read his philosophy and it's exactly what you'd expect. That's very memeable.
@@Autonomous_617 well the thing is, his own ideas suggest for you to take part of his ideas then make your own spin on it, so not really. its anarchists and communists that pretend he is one of them that departs lmao, if you actually read the book, he even said "if you gotten this far, you surely do not have jewish blood in you" lmao because he was based, also stirner wasn't a leftist, its a massive cope, he would support fascism if it benefited him
Max Steiner saved my sanity in highschool years and later. I bought his book in the antiques shop and use him in discussions with teachers and everyone else. Some people nowdays due to increased religiousness and intolerance, cheap psychology studies confuse him with autism. Max Stirner was the peak of Western philosophy and if you would to describe what he was to religious people it eould be a prophet, Messiah, talking bush, one with holy spirit and god. Maxy was a Holy Trinity
As someone who studied Stirner before the internet was much more than message boards, I think he is one of those philosophers whose rhetorical style made his already controversial ideas prime fuel for edgelords and a prime target of social moralists of all stripes. However, the message I have always gotten from his works is one of individual authenticity for oneself and individual responsibility to oneself for all. His denouncement of sacred ...anything suggests that nothing is above suspicion because nothing is underpinned by anything except the individual, that all possessions - be it a couch, or an idea, or a relationship - should be constantly re-evaluated, taken or tossed as it serves the needs, desires, and circumstances of the one who possesses it in the moment. Anything more risks turning possessions into sacred relics that stall and poison individual freedom. ...pardon the ramble. I hope that made sense.
i think stirner works best if you read him in your mid 20s just the breath of fresh air his views provide. i think in chapter 2 he goes on about the youth growing up into an adult man. And the shifting views from an idealist to a more egoist point of view. its very honest and looking at todays world it kinda explains how everything is so self serving and egoistic. and it helps you not getting consumed by this world.
Commenting for the algo because i want more stirner videos...is stirner saying like Nietzsche: What is good? - All that heightens the feelings of power, the will to power, power itself in man. What is bad? - All that proceeds from weakness. A plea to for all mankind to forget false narratives and focus on becoming the best versions of themselves.
Lots of similarities and plenty of debate about possible influence/co-incidence. There’s probably some nuanced differences, with Stirner being ok with weakness when we choose it for our own, instead of it being a morality. Nietz seems more committed to a hierarchy of will, Stirner is more anarchic maybe. Idk I haven’t deeply read either I’m a RUclips comment lol
@@PhilosophyToons Oh, you haven't heard of them? Assumed these folks were already on your radar. (THE POST SCHOPENHAUERIANS) 1. Philipp Mainländer 2. Julius Bahnsen 3. Eduard von Hartmann 4. Helene Druskowitz 5. Olga plumacher I also suggest you to read ALBERT CARACO (THE PROPHET OF CARNAGE) "Reading Albert Caraco is a torture. He may be the last truly dangerous author of world literature". -- Frédéric Saenen
@@PhilosophyToons Oh, you haven't heard of them?Assumed these folks were already on your radar. 1. Philipp Mainländer 2. Julius Bahnsen 3. Eduard von Hartmann 4. Helene Druskowitz 5. Olga Plumacher
Max Stirner's philosophy is vary similar to Buddhism, except with the role of the 'ego' reversed. Both Buddhism and Stirnerism teach us to detach ourselves from abstract ideals and attachments. Because they can haunt us and cause suffering. However, unlike in Buddhism, the ego is a good thing according to max stirner.
I don’t even think Stirnerism is proper “egoism”…it’s more egoism in a Freudian sense. Being true to your own image of yourself. Buddhism is similar. You are to ignore the Freudian Super-Ego and Id in order to find your true self in the via media. So…really they get to the same points in the same
Yes, "Stirn" is German for "forehead". And as far I remember Stirner didn´t write about wheels in the head but about too many rafters in the mind. At least in the German original. By the way, "Der Einzige und sein Eigentum" literally means "The Only One and his property."
Wheels in your head is said in the, "Ego and its Property" translation, while the 'Rafters in your head' translation is done by Wolfi Landstreicher (a more accurate translation than the originally popular Ego one, which has many erroneous elements including the emphasis on Ego where Stirner did not have it). The original German goes as thus, "Mensch, es spukt in Deinem Kopfe; Du hast einen Sparren zu viel! Du bildest Dir große Dinge ein und malst Dir eine ganze Götterwelt aus, die für Dich da sei, ein Geisterreich, zu welchem Du berufen seist, ein Ideal, das Dir winkt. Du hast eine fixe Idee!"
The Ego and it's own was actually the first real philosophy book I read. I still think it's an excellent starting point to philosophy and brings you about half way though your late teen existential crisis
This is why the world is what it is and is heading where it's heading. It's a "not even wrong" philosophy. You cannot separate yourself from the world as if you were not in it and expect good results.
wow, never heard of him, yet I've made a very similar personal philosophy which I've followed. To me the abstract is that which is perfectly itself and cannot be anything but itself. The ideal is therefor an abstract and as everything in reality is composite and cannot only be perfectly itself but it rather many things at once, then nothing in reality is ideal, perfect or abstract. All ideals wether they be religious or otherwise are therefor not reality and to believe in any one of them is believing in the unreal. However the abstract can be seen as a blueprint after which the real may imperfectly try to shape itself according to. So we are composite aspiring towards the abstract without the chance of ever achieving it, accepting that is healthy. Also one can decide to be shapeless which sounds more like Stirners approach and which is true anarchy.
The introduction of his book is interesting, but couldn't we also say that Stirner himself is also possessed by the fixed idea of "ego" "my interest" "me" "myself" "self"?
But I kinda agree with how he compares ideologies and fixed ideas to "ghosts" that possess people's mind and controls them. Instead of the idea serving and pleasing the mind, the mind serves and pleases the idea, the cause, the abstract concept.
Look up Kane B. He has a wonderful, if a little dry, series on Stirner where he speaks a little about the concept of the Unique - the direct translation of a word that is often translated as Ego in Stirner - and how it is a placeholder word, like a name, for the individual, which Stirner considers beyond definition.
nope, he literally cooperated with communists that hated individual rights when it suited his self interest, he isn't at all possessed by anything. imagine ideologies like a shirt you wear, if it gets wet just change it
Good video but the dimension of his work which relates to Marx and the young hegelians isn't explored. Which is a shame since its arguably why the Stirner is still relevant.
No, no, no, no, no. You strawmanned his egoic god bit. He makes the distinction that God is all in all, so all causes are his cause, so like this he is only for himself and his own cause.
His philosophy really coincides with the idea of ego identity in psychology. A "fixed idea" is like someone shaping their ego identity around "spooks", or ideas with no real basis in reality.
I think part of why he became so well known is that his depiction in the iconic drawings making him look like someone who thinks he's above everyone and everything, then you read his philosophy and it's exactly what you'd expect. That's very memeable.
He does look like that lol
The memes made him popular but also always drastically and grossly depart from his actual ideas.
exactly, his philsophy at its core is action based upon personal passion and love
@@Autonomous_617 well the thing is, his own ideas suggest for you to take part of his ideas then make your own spin on it, so not really.
its anarchists and communists that pretend he is one of them that departs lmao,
if you actually read the book, he even said "if you gotten this far, you surely do not have jewish blood in you" lmao
because he was based, also stirner wasn't a leftist, its a massive cope, he would support fascism if it benefited him
Max Steiner saved my sanity in highschool years and later. I bought his book in the antiques shop and use him in discussions with teachers and everyone else.
Some people nowdays due to increased religiousness and intolerance, cheap psychology studies confuse him with autism.
Max Stirner was the peak of Western philosophy and if you would to describe what he was to religious people it eould be a prophet, Messiah, talking bush, one with holy spirit and god. Maxy was a Holy Trinity
I mean the first and last pages are great but the middle parts are boring af
@@hallucinatingsiren jfl
As someone who studied Stirner before the internet was much more than message boards, I think he is one of those philosophers whose rhetorical style made his already controversial ideas prime fuel for edgelords and a prime target of social moralists of all stripes.
However, the message I have always gotten from his works is one of individual authenticity for oneself and individual responsibility to oneself for all. His denouncement of sacred ...anything suggests that nothing is above suspicion because nothing is underpinned by anything except the individual, that all possessions - be it a couch, or an idea, or a relationship - should be constantly re-evaluated, taken or tossed as it serves the needs, desires, and circumstances of the one who possesses it in the moment. Anything more risks turning possessions into sacred relics that stall and poison individual freedom.
...pardon the ramble. I hope that made sense.
Most edgelords who grew with Stirner are now girls lol
i’m one of those edgelords 😡
@@obijack08 Do and be whatever you like but accept the consequences of your choices.
i think stirner works best if you read him in your mid 20s
just the breath of fresh air his views provide. i think in chapter 2 he goes on about the youth growing up into an adult man. And the shifting views from an idealist to a more egoist point of view.
its very honest and looking at todays world it kinda explains how everything is so self serving and egoistic. and it helps you not getting consumed by this world.
yes but he also said there is nothing wrong with being self serving and egoistic, so you misinterpreted him
Awesome video. I can appreciate the wide range of philosophers you cover. Makes for interesting videos.
Commenting for the algo because i want more stirner videos...is stirner saying like Nietzsche: What is good? - All that heightens the feelings of power, the will to power, power itself in man. What is bad? - All that proceeds from weakness. A plea to for all mankind to forget false narratives and focus on becoming the best versions of themselves.
Lots of similarities and plenty of debate about possible influence/co-incidence. There’s probably some nuanced differences, with Stirner being ok with weakness when we choose it for our own, instead of it being a morality. Nietz seems more committed to a hierarchy of will, Stirner is more anarchic maybe. Idk I haven’t deeply read either I’m a RUclips comment lol
"I should be able to do whatever the hell I want" Rude is a SPOOK. NICE VIDEO 🎉🎉🎉
OG back with a video 👌
Thnx bro
More Stirner content would be cool.
Please do one on philip mainlander next
There isnt much content on him on RUclips
On all sons and daughters of Schopenhauer!!! Mainlander, Bhansen, Hartmann, Plumacher, Druskowitz...
@@Wahid_4770 have the first names for those people?
@@PhilosophyToons
Oh, you haven't heard of them? Assumed these folks were already on your radar.
(THE POST SCHOPENHAUERIANS)
1. Philipp Mainländer
2. Julius Bahnsen
3. Eduard von Hartmann
4. Helene Druskowitz
5. Olga plumacher
I also suggest you to read ALBERT CARACO (THE PROPHET OF CARNAGE)
"Reading Albert Caraco is a torture. He may be the last truly dangerous author of world literature".
-- Frédéric Saenen
@@PhilosophyToons
weltschmerz: pessimism in German philosophy 1860-1900 by Fredrick Beiser
@@PhilosophyToons
Oh, you haven't heard of them?Assumed these folks were already on your radar.
1. Philipp Mainländer
2. Julius Bahnsen
3. Eduard von Hartmann
4. Helene Druskowitz
5. Olga Plumacher
Max Stirner's philosophy is vary similar to Buddhism, except with the role of the 'ego' reversed.
Both Buddhism and Stirnerism teach us to detach ourselves from abstract ideals and attachments. Because they can haunt us and cause suffering.
However, unlike in Buddhism, the ego is a good thing according to max stirner.
I don’t even think Stirnerism is proper “egoism”…it’s more egoism in a Freudian sense. Being true to your own image of yourself.
Buddhism is similar. You are to ignore the Freudian Super-Ego and Id in order to find your true self in the via media.
So…really they get to the same points in the same
@@dstinnettmusic so it's like be yourself
Yes, "Stirn" is German for "forehead". And as far I remember Stirner didn´t write about wheels in the head but about too many rafters in the mind. At least in the German original. By the way, "Der Einzige und sein Eigentum" literally means "The Only One and his property."
Wheels in your head is said in the, "Ego and its Property" translation, while the 'Rafters in your head' translation is done by Wolfi Landstreicher (a more accurate translation than the originally popular Ego one, which has many erroneous elements including the emphasis on Ego where Stirner did not have it).
The original German goes as thus,
"Mensch, es spukt in Deinem Kopfe; Du hast einen Sparren zu viel! Du bildest Dir große Dinge ein und malst Dir eine ganze Götterwelt aus, die für Dich da sei, ein Geisterreich, zu welchem Du berufen seist, ein Ideal, das Dir winkt. Du hast eine fixe Idee!"
Thank you for the information. Very interesting indeed.
@@incitatuspersonified6586
i really loved this video.
hope you do another Stirner video
This video is a spook
Always happy to enjoy some Young Hegelian content.
The Ego and it's own was actually the first real philosophy book I read. I still think it's an excellent starting point to philosophy and brings you about half way though your late teen existential crisis
Makes me think about the emergence of the phrase "I'm just doing me"
Yes! 🤘
Stirner invented trolling
This is why the world is what it is and is heading where it's heading. It's a "not even wrong" philosophy. You cannot separate yourself from the world as if you were not in it and expect good results.
We just need more philosophy in general too much material "wealth" not enough mental enrichment
If you want someone not to separate themself from the world make the world worth it.
Stirner doesnt advocate for separation from the world.
@@giannisparanis3373 His philosophy is still part of the problem
Stirner is a mood
The photo of Bavaria shows Munich, but Stirner was born in Bayreuth.
My 1yr old baby has independently developed this same philosophy, he's brilliant!!
your baby is so based
LOL
my goat
He is most Literaly a sith in real life
wow, never heard of him, yet I've made a very similar personal philosophy which I've followed. To me the abstract is that which is perfectly itself and cannot be anything but itself. The ideal is therefor an abstract and as everything in reality is composite and cannot only be perfectly itself but it rather many things at once, then nothing in reality is ideal, perfect or abstract. All ideals wether they be religious or otherwise are therefor not reality and to believe in any one of them is believing in the unreal. However the abstract can be seen as a blueprint after which the real may imperfectly try to shape itself according to. So we are composite aspiring towards the abstract without the chance of ever achieving it, accepting that is healthy. Also one can decide to be shapeless which sounds more like Stirners approach and which is true anarchy.
Fantastic!
When I was young I saw a cartoon called Ghostbusters and I saw someone look like stirner
The introduction of his book is interesting, but couldn't we also say that Stirner himself is also possessed by the fixed idea of "ego" "my interest" "me" "myself" "self"?
But I kinda agree with how he compares ideologies and fixed ideas to "ghosts" that possess people's mind and controls them. Instead of the idea serving and pleasing the mind, the mind serves and pleases the idea, the cause, the abstract concept.
He also mentioned that you can have these ideas as something disposable to have and then rid of when it does not please you anymore.
Look up Kane B. He has a wonderful, if a little dry, series on Stirner where he speaks a little about the concept of the Unique - the direct translation of a word that is often translated as Ego in Stirner - and how it is a placeholder word, like a name, for the individual, which Stirner considers beyond definition.
nope, he literally cooperated with communists that hated individual rights when it suited his self interest, he isn't at all possessed by anything.
imagine ideologies like a shirt you wear, if it gets wet just change it
Good video but the dimension of his work which relates to Marx and the young hegelians isn't explored. Which is a shame since its arguably why the Stirner is still relevant.
Nice
I sing because - I am a singer. But I use you for it because I - need ears.
i'm gay
Compare Max Stirner to that of Ayn Rand.
well, plato means broad, and cicero means chick pea
🤓🤓
plato was gymmaxxing 6'4 chad
No, no, no, no, no. You strawmanned his egoic god bit.
He makes the distinction that God is all in all, so all causes are his cause, so like this he is only for himself and his own cause.
ego! ja, i got it! laveyan here, so...
His philosophy really coincides with the idea of ego identity in psychology. A "fixed idea" is like someone shaping their ego identity around "spooks", or ideas with no real basis in reality.
max stirner, it's the name you long to touch, but you mustn't touch...
200th liker is me kissesss =D
2spooky4me
stirner is not real he was made up by engels
I support this claim wholeheartedly
this is just marxist cope, there is alot of evidence of him being real
my favorite conspiracy theory
I knew it!
this if true makes Marx's writings just seething over Stirner even funnier
um, yeah, because delbel is basic. he can shove that fulton building somewhere too. worst prof @ ccc