We really need to sit down and come up with a definitive list

>>9473408
how can so many people not understand stirner? it's not particularly complicated. motivations that come from outside of yourself are spooks. take family for an example. liking your dad and hanging out with him doesn't make you spooked. hanging out with your dad BECAUSE he is part of your family even though you hate him means you've been spooked by the idea of ‘family’, which comes from outside yourself. this isn't much more than basic criticism - he's pointing to society’s sources of values that tell you to do things and saying, “they’re all the same, all outside yourself, all as valid as 'commands' from a christian god.” what makes stirner unique is his solution. most critics dismiss one particular source of values and then replace it with something else that's also outside themselves; think of someone disparaging christian values, but replacing them with the just-as-spooky values of liberal humanism. stirner says the way to get back of spooks once and for all is to take motivation from only one place, from inside yourself: from the ego. nietzsche has a great description of how someone can start to live like this in thus spoke zarathustra when he describes the camel, lion and child. try to understand what he's really getting at it in the ego and its own, which is pretty revolutionary once the subtleties are understood, before you listen to how people have applied his reasoning to moral theory, political theory, etc. don't try to argue with his anecdotes or anything like that, they are just stand-ins for what he's trying to do, and can be replaced with whatever you'd like.`

*spook

Everything that is not a spoon is'nt a spoon.

>>9473408
you need to suck your mothers cock

Honestly with the state of this board right now, it would literally be impossible with any sort of genuity. Also the misogyny. No point in coming up with a "definitive" list when it will just be biased anyways.

>>9473411
this, you couldnt come up with definitive lists. all things are spooks but the individual

>>9473427
>misogyny
spook

Have any of you at all bothered to you know read the book? Its obvious people are just calling any social construct a spook without knowing what he was actually talking about.

>>9473506
Isn't reading Stirner as a philosophical pursuit in and of itself a spook?

>>9473575
hope this is b8

>>9473575
His philosophy is all about the individual and some spooks might work in the individuals interest such as egoism

For what purpose? An individual should contemplate whether or not something is a spook in the moment in which that something is pertinent to getting or not getting what they desire.

>>9473411
But how does one distinguish between motivations that come from within and motivations that come from the outside?
How do I know whether I actually think that my dad is a cool guy? Maybe the way I perceive him is influneced by spooks?

>>9473575
>>9473585
read the book you bozos

Why are all of Stirner's depictions nothing but scribbles? Were cameras his spook?

>>9473654
cameras didnt fucken exist you knee grow

>>9473666
>cameras didn't exist in the 19th century
Your kind is not welcome around here.

I'll give it a go:

1.chuck norris
2.chuck norris
3.nuck chorris
4.cuck norris
5. spoon...dang it!

>>9473408
Do not try and bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth...there is no spoon. Then you will see it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

>>9473686
spooner

>>9473408
Everything communists don't like is a spook, everything else is not.

>>9473602
>But how does one distinguish between motivations that come from within and motivations that come from the outside?

Introspection and hypotheticals anon.

Eg
-How do I feel when I visit him
-how do I feel before I visit him
-do I visit him outside of holidays or prompting from others
-In what circumstances would I stop visiting him
-ect.

>>9473702
him? that sounds pretty gay

File: Platón2.jpg (85KB, 569x753px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 569x753px

>>9473408
A spoon is characterized by its spooness. Spooness is casted upon eartly objects by participation of the latter in the Spoon form that exist in the heavenly realm of greatest reality.
Therefore, a not-spoon is any earthly object that does not participate in the Spoon form.

>>9473740
>spooness
a lady spoon?

File: Platón2.jpg (139KB, 569x753px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 569x753px

>>9473772
The quality of being a spoon. Its essence.

File: 50._Wittgenstein_in_Swansea_(taken_by_Ben_Richards).jpg (19KB, 220x355px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 220x355px

>>9473408
>a definitive list of what is and what isn't a spoon
1. Spoon: Everything people call a spoon.
2. Not a spoon: Everything else.

Solved.

File: spooning_boys.jpg (330KB, 800x462px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 800x462px

this is a spoon

>>9473702
>Introspection and hypotheticals anon.
Yes, I get that. But isn`t it possible that my very feelings are affected by the "outside"?
How do I make sure that something truly comes from within and isn`t infested by spooks I learnt and internalised a long time ago and that I now am unconsciously projecting on, say, the relationship with my dad?

>>9473411
Tonight on "Copypasta or not"

>>9473408
>We really need to sit down and come up with a definitive list of what is and what isn't a spoon
I'm dying

>>9473408
Love is a spook.

>entered this thread expecting numerous pictures of varied silverware and cutlery
>instead i got another typical stirner thread

I'm disappointed in all of you.

>>9474088
pretty sure its pasta

>>9474127
>>9474088
The difference between a post that's just a normal sincere post and one that's copypasta and how we perceive it knowing that it's pasta or thinking it is when it isn't or not knowing it is is actually pretty deep philosophically and psychologically

10/10 question, would debate

>>9473408
A spoon is whatever form emulates the function of sublime spooness

File: 1489084776872.jpg (88KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 750x1334px

>>9473411
>take family for an example. liking your dad and hanging out with him doesn't make you spooked.
but you like him only because your parents did everything for you to like him, because your parents were spooked

>>9474043
>But isn`t it possible that my very feelings are affected by the "outside"?

Of course, all of which is magnified by the fact that your authentic interests change with time as well.

>How do I make sure that something truly comes from within and isn`t infested by spooks I learnt and internalised a long time ago and that I now am unconsciously projecting on,

Its a lifestyle anon, its not something you can do over a weekend. Or even a couple of years. However as you carry it out over years the foreign and spooky influences will become clearer to you - much in the same way that peer pressure is easier to spot now than say when you were in primary or grade school.

File: ax.jpg (46KB, 606x340px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 606x340px

>>9473408
>determining spooks with other people's help
>constructing a moral view
>using stirner's terms for it

you are way much spooked my friend

>>9475148
Shut the fuck up if you haven't read the books please.

>all these absolute plebs legitimately trying to explain stirner instead of taking advantage of this glorious spoon-themed shitposting opportunity

>>9475189
This, opened the thread ready for loads of spoon quips. Quite dissapointing.

>>9473411
so, as a white nationalist, I am not spooked because I actually like white people and do not like non-white people? hmm, gets my brain trainin

>>9473575
Depends what you mean by "as a philosophical pursuit".

If you legit mean "for philosophy/truth's sake" then yep, it's spooked, but if you really mean "for its own sake (i.e. its own inherent benefits to you)" then no, it isn't.

>>9475289
You're spooked by the concept of race out of liking a few black people; and are all the poorer for it.

>>9475289
If you could legitimately dislike each and every non-white and like each and every white person and for reasons other than spooks, yep. But that situation's not actually possible, not without spooks.

It's like the people who say "I just find black girls ugly, aren't I allowed to have preferences? That's not racism", and then explain away good-looking black girls because they have "white features".

File: vargo-ultra-spork__59873_zoom.jpg (67KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 450x450px

I am about to blow your fucking mind.

>>9475080
Hm. Okay, thanks for explaining!

>>9473740
Fuck you, reddit.

There is no spoon

>>9473575
I believe Stirner would fall on the fairly controversial claim that his book is not philosophical but therapeutic, like Wittgenstein claimed much latter of his PI.

By means of Stirner's "therapy" you get yourself unspooked.

>>9473408
-Fork
-Knife
-Sieve
-Plate
-Masher
-Grater
-Ladle
-etc etc

>>9473408
to call something not a "spoon" is a spoon in itself

>>9473785
>The quality of being a spoon. Its essence.

That would be 'spoonness', not 'spooness'.
Apropos, note too that the spooness is often, albeit not always, the spoonee or little spoon.

>>9475880
No why would he do that. Wanting to be "therapised" would be spooked.

He just wrote it because he had a cool idea and it would eat at him not to write it down -- also because discourse is just plain fun.

That's what he said, at any rate.

File: 1461153821201.png (157KB, 633x800px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 633x800px

>>9473408
Fuck off, racist

File: 1477999608605.png (19KB, 444x444px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 444x444px

>mfw looking at all the sycophants in this thread who believe they arent spooked but couldnt be more spooked if they binged at a spookbusters outlet clearance sale

>>9475880
>I believe Stirner would fall on the fairly controversial claim that his book is not philosophical but therapeutic, like Wittgenstein claimed much latter of his PI.

This anon is correct in him not writing it for that reason

"Let us choose another convenient example. I see how men are fretted in dark superstition by a swarm of ghosts. If to the extent of my powers I let a bit of daylight fall in on the nocturnal spookery, is it perchance because love to you inspires this in me? Do I write out of love to men? No, I write because I want to procure for my thoughts an existence in the world; and, even if I foresaw that these thoughts would deprive you of your rest and your peace, even if I saw the bloodiest wars and the fall of many generations springing up from this seed of thought — I would nevertheless scatter it. Do with it what you will and can, that is your affair and does not trouble me. You will perhaps have only trouble, combat, and death from it, very few will draw joy from it. If your weal lay at my heart, I should act as the church did in withholding the Bible from the laity, or Christian governments, which make it a sacred duty for themselves to “protect the common people from bad books.”

However it is wrong to say that wanting to write a therapeutic book like that is spooked any more than wanting to procure the existence of your ideas are

>>9473575
"However, for the man who studies to gain insight, books and studies are merely rungs of the ladder on which he climbs to the summit of knowledge. As soon as a rung has raised him up one step, he leaves it behind. On the other hand, the many who study in order to fill their memory do not use the rungs of the ladder for climbing, but take them off and load themselves with them to take away, rejoicing at the increasing weight of the burden. They remain below forever, because they bear what should have bourne them."

File: 14214803958150.jpg (559KB, 2190x1200px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 2190x1200px

>>9473408
There is no spoon

>>9478607
holy shit give me more

>>9473408
>We really need to sit down and
read his fucking book

>>9473411
Isn't Stirner a spook for influencing me?

>>9479988
the only people who don't get stirner are the people who've spent their entire lives following other people.

>>9480049
or who haven't read him or who can't admit that they are spooked.