Editing Max Stirner (section)

=== ''The Philosophical Reactionaries'' ===
''The Philosophical Reactionaries'' (''Die Philosophischen Reactionäre'') was published in 1847 in ''Die Epigonen'', a journal edited by Otto Wigand from Leipzig. At the time, Wigand had already published ''The Unique and Its Property'' and was about to finish the publication of Stirner's translations of Adam Smith and Jean-Baptiste Say. As the subtitle indicates, ''The Philosophical Reactionaries'' was written in response to a 1847 article by [[Kuno Fischer]] (1824–1907) entitled ''The Modern Sophists'' (''Die Moderne Sophisten''). The article was signed G. Edward and its authorship has been disputed ever since John Henry Mackay "cautiously" attributed it to Stirner and included it in his collection of Stirner's lesser writings. It was first translated into English in 2011 by Widukind De Ridder and the introductory note explains:
{{blockquote|Mackay based his attribution of this text to Stirner on Kuno Fischer's subsequent reply to it, in which the latter, 'with such determination', identified G. Edward as Max Stirner. The article was entitled 'Ein Apologet der Sophistik und "ein Philosophischer Reactionäre{{"'}} and was published alongside 'Die Philosophischen Reactionäre'. Moreover, it seems rather odd that Otto Wigand would have published 'Edward's' piece back-to-back with an article that falsely attributed it to one of his personal associates at the time. And, indeed, as Mackay went on to argue, Stirner never refuted this attribution. This remains, however, a slim basis on which to firmly identify Stirner as the author. This circumstantial evidence has led some scholars to cast doubts over Stirner's authorship, based on both the style and content of 'Die Philosophischen Reactionäre'. One should, however, bear in mind that it was written almost three years after ''Der Einzige und sein Eigentum'', at a time when Young Hegelianism had withered away.<ref>"The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer. Translated and introduced by Widukind De Ridder", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 90 (2011).</ref>}}

The majority of the text deals with Kuno Fischer's definition of sophism. With much wit, the self-contradictory nature of Fischer's criticism of sophism is exposed. Fischer had made a sharp distinction between sophism and philosophy while at the same time considering it as the "mirror image of philosophy". The sophists breathe "philosophical air" and were "dialectically inspired to a formal volubility". Stirner's answer is striking:
{{blockquote|Have you philosophers really no clue that you have been beaten with your own weapons? Only one clue. What can your common sense reply when I dissolve dialectically what you have merely posited dialectically? You have showed me with what kind of 'volubility' one can turn everything to nothing and nothing to everything, black into white and white into black. What do you have against me, when I return to you your pure art?<ref>"The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (''Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought''), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 99 (2011).</ref>}}

Looking back on ''The Unique and Its Property'', Stirner claims that "Stirner himself has described his book as, in part, a clumsy expression of what he wanted to say. It is the arduous work of the best years of his life, and yet he calls it, in part, 'clumsy'. That is how hard he struggled with a language that was ruined by philosophers, abused by state-, religious- and other believers, and enabled a boundless confusion of ideas".<ref>"The Philosophical Reactionaries: 'The Modern Sophists' by Kuno Fischer", Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner ''(Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought''), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 104 (2011).</ref>