>mfw stirnerfags don't realise the self is the biggest

>>8229788
it cant be because by definition a spook is something that hinders the self

>>8229788
yeah stirner never put the self in doubt but it's not like you can escape it.

>>8229811
only if you're a pleb

never even read him but i know this

>>8229788
Ego death is a drug-addled hippie meme.

>>8229813
well yeah you can escape it by putting a fucking bullet in your skull, in fact i think it be great that you do so.

>>8229822
ego is an ideology-addled pleb meme

>>8229788
literally the opposite of a spook

spooks are not necessarily a negative thing
Stirner just uses them as examples of empty ideas that hold power over the individual

>>8229888

you're a retard my man, haha.

File: 1451076154642.png (35KB, 244x295px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 244x295px

How can a nothing be a spook?

>>8230633
How can a nothing be?

>>8231703
A nothing can't be nor not be.

>>8231849
A 'no thing' per definition is not.

>>8231856
But there is no be to not be for a nothing.

The true self is not the self that can be named

kill yourself then

File: images.jpg (10KB, 213x237px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 213x237px

Is Simone Weil's idea of uncreation compatible with stirner's egoism?

I am too lazy to read through this thread but everyone here better be on the same page where regards the immutable absence of free will and the logical impossibility of the concept itself.