Is Cultural Relativism a Spook, or is it a genuine concept?

Do you agree with this statement?

(I'm not quoting Stirner fyi)

Stirner is always right.

The cultures where the ego can roam free are better than the ones where the ego is manipulated

Morality is a spook. Culture is a collection of spooks. Cultural relativism is an ideology.

Concepts are a spook

Statements are spooks

cultural relativism is a legit thing in the west.
The faults in the west are pointed out and exaggerated to the point of extreme self hatred from liberals, the faults found in non western non white societies are ignored or made excuses for.

If a christian refuses to make a cake for a gay couple the christian has their business destroyed by enraged liberals.

If a muslim cuts someones head off.
#not all muslims, god, stop being so racist, its a religion of peace!

Culture is a construct, an ideology, a spook. It is a perversion of understanding and it generally haunts one's will.

As usual, a shitposter from Holla Forums hasn't actually read Stirner to find out what a spook is.

Simply because something is an abstract idea or concept does not, ipso facto, make it a spook.

Cultural relativism is an anthropological tool for study and analysis not a normative position you fools

lol i thought that was the point


Read stirner

so wait, you should accept abstract concepts and ideas if you think it benefits you? or what, i don't get it

The spook is a fixed idea. Idea like thought or concept indeeed but the fixed, as obessional part is also important in defining the spook.

A spook is a idea you put above yourself

And you want everybody to also bow before it. It's like you're only a vessel for the concept, it kinda possesses you.
Seriously read Stirner.

The voluntary egoist owns everything including his thoughts, and so utilizes what empowers him to make use of his property and disregards that which impedes him or attempts to subordinate his will to it. A fixed idea is that which is fundamentally opposed to being changed, a dogma for instance, that possesses the individual and causes one to serve the interests of the idea rather than oneself.

One example is the idea of patriotism. The individual that dies in the service of the "fatherland" or what have you in fact dies fit nothing but an abstract idea. The idea that one piece of land is imbued with special properties over another just by virtue of being born on it is ridiculous, and spending one's life in the service of such a concept is antithetical to the ego serving itself, as the ego is the supreme.

Read Stirner.

As there is no absolute right and no absolute wrong, it is true that no culture is objectively better at a fundamental level than any other. However, once we have chosen a set of values (such as 'don't stone gays and rape women') we can criticize other cultures from within that framework, and do so completely legitimately. We must act as if there is objective good in order to maintain one's own culture.


This, the entire premise of this thread is retarded.



sounds like spooks to me

But what if for the sake of yourself you should put the collective above your own needs because this decision ends up paying off in the long run? The entire concept of "ego" is quite shady, and certainly cannot be reduced to "what you really want" because that's not a clear concept in itself.
Stirner is a good meme, but not one that must be taken seriously. I would say that even taking it seriously is a meme on his own.

"Egoist" doesn't mean "short sighted selfishness."

Read Stirner.

It's a way to justify shitty governance in backwards reactionary shitholes.

History is linear. Fight me.