I think Stirner was emphasizing the external origin of thoughtlessly followed ideologies, to argue that the only authentic beliefs are what you've constructed and understood yourself, not inherited from obligation, tradition, or as a compromise.
Yeah fair, if that's your read on Stirner. On that level I have friendlier disagreement: as much as I think it is healthy for everyone's epistemology to have a good punky resistance to those sorts of ideologies, I also think knowledge construction is very much a social process. On what basis can you evaluate ideological influences from outside? If you have some sort of rubric or metric true to yourself that you built in your own head, how do you know that you haven't just founded it on values handed down to you in your childhood and youth? You're never going to reach some sort of islanded ideal where you become a true unmoved mover so to speak.
That's all very interesting, but my main gripe is the Stirner fans and how they use "spook" I guess, which is a very different discussion lol.
I basically agree, there's no way to fully divorce yourself from environmental circumstances, so beyond having "a good punky resistance" and reading widely, being human is fundamentally social and building society from the individual upwards feels backwards. I respect egoist anarchism, but in the way that I think it's a way to exist socially, not as a way to build all anarchism.
Would it help if they were called "brainworms"?
I think Stirner was emphasizing the external origin of thoughtlessly followed ideologies, to argue that the only authentic beliefs are what you've constructed and understood yourself, not inherited from obligation, tradition, or as a compromise.
Yeah fair, if that's your read on Stirner. On that level I have friendlier disagreement: as much as I think it is healthy for everyone's epistemology to have a good punky resistance to those sorts of ideologies, I also think knowledge construction is very much a social process. On what basis can you evaluate ideological influences from outside? If you have some sort of rubric or metric true to yourself that you built in your own head, how do you know that you haven't just founded it on values handed down to you in your childhood and youth? You're never going to reach some sort of islanded ideal where you become a true unmoved mover so to speak.
That's all very interesting, but my main gripe is the Stirner fans and how they use "spook" I guess, which is a very different discussion lol.
I basically agree, there's no way to fully divorce yourself from environmental circumstances, so beyond having "a good punky resistance" and reading widely, being human is fundamentally social and building society from the individual upwards feels backwards. I respect egoist anarchism, but in the way that I think it's a way to exist socially, not as a way to build all anarchism.