Stirner The Amoralist

Stirner does refute personal affiliation with or living in accordance with any ethical system. Based in this, some online label him an amoralist.

As an ardent normative egoist, I criticize him severely for his alleged amorality. One can assert that one is neither good or bad, but just indifferent to ethical labels. My assertion that amorality does not exist.

If one consciously and deliberately embraces wickedness and knows it and is proud of that choice, then one is wicked.

If one like Stirner, believes that the unique one transcend on ethical considerations, championing amorality, I respond that he is just practicing immorality, knowingly or not, whether blameworthy or not, of his own free will or not. For a wicked robot so programmed or genetically predisposed can do evil and be evil, withot being damnable for his choices and actions.

That he is immoral and to be opposed or destroyed, nonethless, is existentially real.

Either we are good and serve God as an altruist, or egoist, or we serve Satan as an altruist or egoist. Amoral stances to the contrary, the fence-straddler ends up serving Satan, as his amorality is finally disclosed as wickedness burning on a low burner.