Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• GEYER, Carl-Friedrich

Titel

MAX STIRNER 1806 -1856 -2006 : Anmerkungen zu Person, Werk und Wirkung nach 200 Jahren angesichts zweier Jubiläen

Ist Teil von

• Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie, 2006-07, Vol.48 (3), p.253-281

Ort / Verlag

Berlin: De Gruyter

Erscheinungsjahr

2006

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Alma/SFX Local Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Although one of the fathers of the anarchistic movement Max Stirner has been quickly forgotten. He has always been an outsider. The main work of the philosopher who was born in 1806 is "Der Einzige und sein Eigentum" (in English: The Ego and Its/ His Own). This is often referred to as his only work, and apart from a number of minor compilations that is correct. Many other philosophers were inspired by Stirner's work, although almost nobody admitted to be influenced by him. Often misinterpreted as an anarchistic philosophy, it is today's task to put Stirners work into proper perspective. It is more appropriate to see it as a form of nihilism, rather than anarchism. When the book was released in 1845 it was seen as belonging to the same tradition as Protagoras and the sophists. Its main goal was to break the restricting ties of abstract terms like "humankind", and open a view on the single person, the "ego". Stirner assumed that the world is not the result of an autopoietic act, but that the ego created itself from non-being. However, in Stirner's nihilism the ego is still regarded as non-being because of human mortality and the ego's inclusion in the circle of becoming and decay. In Stirner's view God and the ego are distinguished only by the finitude of the ego. He maintained that things like God are holy only because the ego elevated them to a divine status. If an ego accepted its finitude and let go of holy things, life would find its goals by itself. Furthermore, Max Stirner maintains that the state is the annihilator of liberty, because it forces the many egos to become a single humankind. Nonetheless, he did not call for a revolution he was not for revolution, since he held the view that the state would collapse by itself, if all the egos would come to agree with Stirner's view. Instead some egos should form voluntary associations by pursuing the same goals for a certain time. These associations would cease to exist once the goals were no longer shared. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]