Michael, One of the interesting points made in the SEP article was the statement that on some aspects of Stirner's writings, scholars disagree on what he really meant.
Marsha On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:14 AM, Michael R. Brown wrote: > Hi, all. > > The “nihilistic egoist” Max Stirner has some overlaps with Bob, I think. He’s > where the extremest development of Western philosophy touched the core of the > East. Nietzsche is small-fry next to mighty Stirner, as far as egoism goes. > Behold, from Wiki. > > - - - - - > > .....The Unique One [Der Einzige, the liberated egoistic individual] is the > straightforward, sincere, plain-phrase. It is the end point of our phrase > world, of this world in whose "beginning was the Word." — Max Stirner, > Stirner's Critics > > In order to understand this 'creative nothing', Stirner uses poetry and vivid > imagery. The 'creative nothing' by its dialectical shortcomings creates the > need for a description, for meaning. > > What Stirner says is a word, a thought, a concept; what he means is no word, > no thought, no concept. What he says is not what is meant, and what he means > is unsayable. — Max Stirner, Stirner's Critics > > Stirner elaborated this attempt to describe the indescribable in the essay > "Stirner's Critics", written by Stirner in response to Feuerbach and others > (in custom with the time, he refers to himself in the third person) : Stirner > speaks of the Unique and says immediately: Names name you not. He articulates > the word, so long as he calls it the Unique, but adds nonetheless that the > Unique is only a name. He thus means something different from what he says, > as perhaps someone who calls you Ludwig does not mean a Ludwig in general, > but means You, for which he has no word. (...) It is the end point of our > phrase world, of this world in whose "beginning was the Word." — Max Stirner, > Stirner's Critics > > The Ego and Its Own opens and closes with a quotation from Goethe that reads > "I have taken up my cause without foundation", with the unstated next line of > the poem being "…and all the world is mine". One of Stirner's central ideas > is that in realizing the self is "nothing" one is said to "own the world", > because as the book states in its last line: "all things are nothing to me" > [Ibidem., p. 324].David Leopold (in his introduction to the Cambridge > University Press Edition of The Ego and its own) expresses disbelief at what > Stirner has to say about the nature of mind, world, and property. Both the > belief in the self being "nothing" and that "the world is empty" have no > similar Western precedent. But in Eastern Philosophy Buddhism has comparable > aspects: > > By bringing the essence into prominence one degrades the hitherto > misapprehended appearance to a bare semblance, a deception. The essence of > the world, so attractive and splendid, is for him who looks to the bottom of > it — emptiness; emptiness is — world's essence (world's doings). ...." — Max > Stirner, The Ego and Its Own p. 40 > > ... [F]or 'being' is abstraction, as is even 'the I'. Only I am not > abstraction alone: I am all in all, consequently, even abstraction or > nothing: I am all and nothing; I am not a mere thought, but at the same time > I am full of thoughts, a thought-world. ...." — Max Stirner, The Ego and Its > Own p. 300 > > I say: liberate yourself as far as you can, and you have done your part; for > it is not given to every one to break through all limits, or, more > expressively, not to everyone is that a limit which is a limit for the rest. > Consequently, do not tire yourself with toiling at the limits of others; > enough if you tear down yours. [...] He who overturns one of his limits may > have shown others the way and the means; the overturning of their limits > remains their affair. ...." — Max Stirner, The Ego and Its Own p. 127 > > Stirner describes this world-view, in brief, as "enjoyment", and he claims > that the "nothingness" of the non-self is "unutterable" (p. 314) or > "unnameable" (p. 132), "unspeakable" yet "a mere word" (p. 164; cf. Stirner's > comments on the Skeptic concepts ataraxia and aphasia, p. 26). > > - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Max_Stirner > > - - - - - > > The unstoppable Phaedrus, and the not-so-Mr-Nice-Guy narrator, have some > Stirner-egoist traces, to be sure. Then came the opening out into connection > – which after all can be an “egoist” joy too. > > > MRB ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
