I just began reading The Ego and Its Own, and I'm already

>>9364114
>One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
>Ephesians 4:6 KJV

Therefore, since God is in all things (is everything), his cause must be egoistic since he can only look to himself, being everything. I don't understand what's fallacious about this.

>>9364114
Just means that the will of God is THE will.

>>9364114
It gets good half way through, it remains fedora though.

>>9364129
My dude, it doesn't matter if you believe in God or not, but:

In Christianism and in most religions, God is perfect and his logic is beyond our comprehension. If he tells us that we must adore him because he is perfect, and he says he is right in doing so, then, my dude, he is right. If he says he has no sin and he's not one bit egoistic, he is right.

Now, if you don't believe in God, the only reason you'd make such an statement such as the one I quoted, is to be ironic, trying to make fun of Christians with a smug face saying "Gotcha. Wheres ur all perfect god nao?"

File: wat.gif (445KB, 250x175px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 250x175px

>>9364150
>If he says he has no sin and he's not one bit egoistic, he is right.
This is just a language game. He's only right here because you've prescribed "perfect logic" to him. His statement that "I am not one bit egoistic" is only to his benefit (since, again, he is everything), and is thus egoistic. Who said this was a bad thing, anyway? Oh, that's right, the Christians.
Also:
>doesn't matter if you believe in God
>let me proceed to orient my response around whether or not you believe in God

>>9364150
>it's a retard with no idea of Christianity or theism at large trying to argue based on his unsubstantiated babby tier understanding
fucking kys yourself you retarded piece of ignorant shit, my dude

>>9364150
>God is perfect and his logic is beyond our comprehension

>why did God recreate and introduce the problem of evil in the Universe

God works in mysterious ways
God works in mysterious ways

You are a shitty reader. You make value judgments and criticisms and bitch on /lit/ after a few pages. Don't bother. Stick to watching Rick & Morty, pleb.

Do you mean "fallacious" is a technical term?
I only read
>if P, then P
That's not false.

Stirner doesn't write like Russel, of course. It's meant to be funny.

>>9364114
Stirner tipped so hard that Nietzsche spends most of his works picking up fedoras

I read it and it's not worth finishing imo, property doesn't like being called out as such and just kills you/ostracizes you

>>9364114

You are my least favourite piece of property OP.

File: Nani+what+kisama+why+you+or+i+ll+get+you+_a8b8c08daa0e48679982684115524de6.jpg (27KB, 331x338px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 331x338px

>another christcuck completely btfo by edgy hipsters

>>9364114
t. negroid

>>9364114
Literally the only person for whom God could have created creation was himself.

>>9364164
you're simply redefining "egoism" to be whatever an individual does. this argument is not smart by any means desu

>>9364114
Stirner is clearly too much for you to handle. Don't bother reading the rest. Maybe Paper Towns will be more your speed.

>>9364114
T. Brainlet

>>9364183
>>why did God recreate and introduce the problem of evil in the Universe
We did, by eating the damn fruit. Had we eaten it when it was suitable, we would look at it like we look at the combat of bacteria.

>>9366218
WE

>>9366224
>he hasn't become conscious

>>9364114
>I just began reading The Ego and Its Own, and I'm already considering not finishing it.

What do you think Stirner means by the term:

Spook:

Property:

Creative Nothing:


>That's just plain retarded, autistic and fallacious. And the next few pages are just literature, there is no philosophical method, it's really plain autism.

Its perfectly reasonable however I get the sense that you are mistakenly believing that Stirner is saying we should all be egoists because God is.

You got memed into it.
Stirner has interesting ideas but fails to put them into a proper form (some might argue that this goes hand in hand with his philosophy of not bowing to established boundaries)

He rambles on about meaningless things which don't bring anything of worth to his book.
The book would be a lot better if he reduced the pages to about 50% or less and cut out all the bullshit.

I read the 1st edition in German with some secondary literature but I simply couldn't take it anymore after I dragged myself through half of it.
Just read some secondary stuff and stick to the memes.

>>9366459
I agree with this - he spends a huge amount of time poking holes in Young Heglians and Prussian censors

File: 1476888083485.jpg (14KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x250px

>>9366472
Why did Stirner write the ego and his own?

File: Why.jpg (188KB, 975x451px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 975x451px

>>9366473
Its funny he even wrote a poem in it about why he wrote the book.

What is most surprising is how hes massive criticism towards his peers only came out in this kinda long book. I mean imagine if one of your quiet drinking buddies suddenly wrote an entire book that proved you to be a hypocrit and a faulty thinker.

>>9366459
>meaningless things which don't bring anything of worth to his book.
If you dont understand the point of each critique and its point you dont know how to read his work. He is deconstructing the rhealm of ideas to its origin wich he argues comes from the ego and finnaly deconstructs the ego for what it is and ends at what he calls the ''creative nothing''. Every singly criticism of another young hegelian and the non young hegelians is a step by step deconstruction of diffrint ideas and how the structure of their idea's are all the same type of humanism. re-read the book.

>>9366472
But it was the best part of the book.

>>9366487
So what you're saying is Stirner was the quiet autist who came to school with a gun in his backpack except the gun was getting BTFO?

>>9366516
t h i s

File: P2O0V5p.png (564KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 1366x768px

>>9366551
Sure that's a pretty good analogy

>>9366551
Everything except for the autisitc part

>>9364114

Congrats, you're now too smart for philosophy.

Not that people who like it are dumb. Just that smart people recognize there's better uses for their mind than some pointless logic exercises.

File: 1476402092815.jpg (359KB, 1600x1050px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1600x1050px

>>9364150
>Criticises an argument for being retarded and fallacious

>God works in mysterious ways so we can't no nuffin

End yourself, my dude