:: Bloody hard to spell. I have to take it apart every time I write it.

"god is dead." - nietsche
"nietsche is dead." - god
"'nietzsche' is spelled wrong." - kaufmann

I'm not really all that analytical actually. I do what I want as long as it doesnt hurt anyone else. Nothing I want to do is really negative towards others so I don't worry about it too much.

I'm more into Max Stirner than those conventionally regarded as existentialists. The basic idea of Max Stirner seems to be that I am the owner [of "ownness"]. The world is my property to dispose of as I see fit. What I choose to decide is my own is rightfully mine no matter how I acquire it so long as I am sufficiently powerful to do so and the means feel justifiable to my sense of self, then that's fine.

I can choose to help or please those others who please me or give me happiness by virtue of their happy presence in my life.

All arbitary forms - justice, the state, good, evil, nationhood, the state are so much baggage and mean nothing to me. The state employs violence and calls it justice but when the individual employs violence it calls it crime. Sentiments like that are what comprise Stirner - it's not anti-social perse, it's more a question of choosing your own sense of what's social and whom you're allied or opposed to in life.

Sartre is way too technical to be accessible to any but a relatively small few who can afford to devote a large proportion of their time to studying him and his Communist sympathies and excuses are just plain trash IMHO.

I'd say I prefer Camus to Sartre anyhow.

Sartre's novels are fantastic though, they bring his philosophy somewhere near being accessible to "everyday folks".

Actually you reminded me of a rant I wanted to write over on the existential detective agency.

Here it is:

tribes.tribe.net/existenti...caa102ec93