On stirner - Is Virtue a spook?

>>9937966
oh well I uploaded the wrong picture

>>9937966
A two step guide to identifying spooks:
(1) Is the concept in question /abstract/ If so:
(2) Does it oppress the mind of the individual of which it is part in any way ? If so:

SPOOK and to be disregarded/freed from.

File: stirner.jpg (174KB, 800x832px)

174KB, 800x832px

did someone say SPOOKS

>>9938118
so virtue is a spook?

Nothing is a spook in and of itself. Think of it like distinction between ascetic practice and ascetic ideal. Are you fasting because it's necessary for a ritual? Good. Are you because fasting is good in and of itself? Not good. Pursuing virtue or any other ideals is fine so long as you understand that it's you that it's pursuing it, rather than it possessing you and taking over your life as a whole.

Stirner is not an hedonist and he's not against ideals; if anything what he aims at is something that is above the "spirit" like it is above the "flesh".

"I receive with thanks what the centuries of culture have acquired for me; I am not willing to throw away and give up anything of it: I have not lived in vain. The experience that I have power over my nature, and need not be the slave of my appetites, shall not be lost to me; the experience that I can subdue the world by culture’s means is too dear-bought for me to be able to forget it. But I want still more."

>>9938371
From what I understand he says that we believe there is an Ideal Man, that everyone chases for and holds dear in their hearts. Then Stirner tells you to forget the Ideal Man for it is entirely something else than 'you' and act only for the sake of 'you' and not for achieving the Ideal.
But what's the difference really if you are still going to strive to be virtuous?
He is basically saying "dont strive to be the ideal man, be the ideal man".
What if I want to be the ideal man for my own sake? Am I still spooked? HOW DO I EVER KNOW IF IM SPOOKED OR NOT?
Do I even know what I want? Is natural desire to fuck, eat, and sleep the only unspooked desire?

>>9938651
The difference lies in whether you're self-aware of what you're doing, of your part in the process; it's the difference between sucking up to your boss because you want to get a raise, and doing it because he owns you. Stirner also says evil people don't exist outside of you looking for them, but by that he's not telling you to not worry about thieves and murderers.

And to begin with, Anon, being spooked or not aren't moral categories. You won't necessarily be a better or more desirable person for being unspooked. You've just added Stirner to your morality. You've made a spook out of not having spooks.

>Is natural desire to fuck, eat, and sleep the only unspooked desire?
There's no such thing as natural or unnatural desire. Evrything is egoistic.

>>9938261
>loli Stirner
Doujin when

>>9937966
A less confusing way of thinking about what a spook is or isn't is to consider two binary aspects of the alleged spook:
>is it imaginary?
and
>does it influence you in a way such that you feel obliged to act in a particular way?
If those two things are answered with "yes," then it is a spook.

But remember, egoism isn't about simply banishing all spooks, like >>9938118 suggests. Make sure not to fall for the meme.

When dealing with spooks, it's important to remember Stirner's distinction between freedom and ownness.
>to be free of something is to be rid of it
>to own something is to control it and make it your property

Egoism is all about becoming an "own man," as opposed to becoming a free man. Thus, your goal isn't to rid yourself of spooks, but to master the spooks.

Is virtue a spook? Not in of itself, no. The idea that you ought to live a virtuous life is spooky. But living virtuously isn't inherently spooky.

>>9937966
The true meaning of life is what you define it for yourself; this may entail indulging in spooks for your own benefit and pleasure, and even sharing in them with others, but ultimately you must keep in mind the concept that they are just phantasms, who's only true value is in pleasing the self.

>>9938842
And that is why Stirner is interesting because he presents this concept in the full knowledge that it is, itself, another spook. It's inherently dualistic, parodying itself and self-effacing.

>>9940474
This.

A spooked man would be virtuous because being virtuous is 'good'.

An own man would see virtue as a spook, but decide to be virtuous because he finds pleasure in that for himself.

>>9938261
>maldraw
that fucker