Jason McQuinn

 

 Jason McQuinn wrote an introduction to Wolfi Landstreicher’s translation of Stirner’s Critics by Max Stirner. On Page 5 of his introduction to this translation, McQuinn writes: “Following the translator’s choice (which happens to be my own as well), I will speak of the ‘Unique’ whenever I refer to Max Stirner’s ‘Einzige.’ ‘Einzige’ can be translated from German to English most felicitously as ‘unique’ or ‘unique one.’ However, within Max Stirner’s texts, it should be remembered at all times that he explicitly intends to use this noun not as a typical concept of an incomparable, particular individual, for example), but as a name that points to the actual, nonconceptual person’s life—that life as it is experienced prior to any conceptual interpretation. Thus, when I speak of Stirner’s ‘Einzige’ I will employe ‘Unique’ beginning with a unpper-case ‘U” to indicate and reinforce his intended meaningl When I speak of ‘unique’ entirely in the lower case, I will be intentionally employing the word as a concept, rather than a name.”

 

My response: McQuinn seems to enjoy a keen appreciation of Stirner’s view of the world. Stirner’s the Unique is not an incomparable, particular person, who is objectified as a concept, but implies that what is named is the actual, nonconceptual person’s life as experienced prior to any conceptual interpretation. This is tricky stuff. Stirner wants us to regard each individual as a unique person, named but not conceptualized by others, nor self-conceptualized. The self just is, it is not defined by words or concepts.

 

We may express epistemic horror that without descriptive words or concepts, the person cannot be characterized in meaningful words or concepts. And Stirner would agree. He is a skeptic and a severe nominalist. He is never condescending nor boring.