Mertcan Bulak
@MBulak
1183 okur puanı
Ağustos 2020 tarihinde katıldı
Şu anda okuduğu kitap
In place of punishment, Stirner suggests that individuals take the law into their own hands and demand ‘satisfaction’ for an injury. But while this suggests an authoritarian trend in Stirner’s thought, he maintains that conscious egoists would eventually see the advantage of making peaceful agreements through contract rather than resorting to violence.
Reklam
Stirner believed that it is possible and desirable to form a new association of sovereign individuals:
There we two, the State and I, are enemies. I, the egoist, have not at heart the welfare of this ‘human society’, I sacrifice nothing to it, I only utilize it; but to be able to utilize it completely I transform it rather into my property and my creature; that is, I annihilate it, and form in its place the Union of Egoists.
Even if it could be shown that every individual had expressed the same will, any law enforced by the State would freeze the will and make the past govern the future. As for democracy based on majority rule, it leaves the dissenting minority in the same position as in an absolute monarchy. Since sovereignty inevitably involves domination and submission, Stirner concludes that there can be no such thing as a ‘free State’.
Stirner argues that the ego is the sole creator of moral order. There are no eternal moral truths and no values to be discovered in nature: ‘Owner and creator of my right, I recognize no other source of right than — me, neither God nor the State nor nature nor even man himself.’
To the question ‘What am I?’, Stirner replies: ‘An abyss of lawless and unregulated impulses, desires, wishes, passions, chaos without light or guiding star’.
Reklam