Reading up on anarchism, I thought that I might be classified as an anarcho-individualist, because I believe that the most important aspect of someone's life is themselves, and their ability to make choices for themselves.
But going by the wikipedia article, I don't think that's right. Anarcho-individualism, especially in the US, seems to be more a kind of "fuck you, you can't make me, and maybe I can make you" while my philosophy may be more accurately summarized as "you can't make me, and I can't make you, so let's find a way to get what we both want"
I think I'd call my brand of anarchism "anarcho-pragmatism"
I'd rather be pragmatic in pursuit of my goals, than dogmatic in obeying and following some kind of tenets or rules of even my own philosophy.
From my perspective, trading rigid adherence to society's rules for rigid rejection of society rules still leaves a person without the means to truly express personal autonomy, because it still leaves them externalizing their decisions to some outside force, even if that outside force is itself the ideal of personal autonomy.
anarcho-pragmatism: I do what I want, and I want to work with other people to build a better world.
@Anarkat sounds similar to Anarcho-Egoism / Egoism, definetely has that same aspect of "I do what I want" and rejecting dogma
@tenornix egoism seems to be more of a "fuck you I do what I want" kind of philosophy. I don't think it very well captures my personal view of the world, although the distinction is kind of unclear without getting down into the details of it.
@Anarkat I suppose arguing over if egoism is actually "fuck you I do what I want " or "I do what I want" and which one is your personal philosophy seems a bit pointless. I am not you and even with larger character limits per toot this format seems ill-suited to argue about that
In this case I think it really comes down to what you do with it personally. I mean you can proclaim to be the biggest humanist moralist upholder of values that has ever lived and still be a prick in-person and then you can bei an egoist and actually be really nice (if you get what I mean)
@tenornix well labels are kind of meaningless in the face of actual actions, right?
I don't really care very much what my philosophy could be labeled, as much as I'm interested in how my philosophy relates to other people.
Of course, this can't capture the whole of my personal philosophy. I think that at a certain level of abstraction, my personal philosophy, cliché as it may be, could maybe be described as a pursuit of truth, and seeking to help other people to find their own truth.
There are several people, who could be called philosophers, who I see as wanting to do the same, who have committed their lives to trying to help guide people to their own truth.
Tomas Kalnoky.
Rebecca Sugar
Jiddu Krishnamurti
Bo Burnham, maybe? He's kind of hard to pin down.
If you have the time, and you want to explore ideas, read and watch and listen to media from these people with the aim of seeking to understand what the intentional message of their media is. I believe there's a very important and intentional message in the things that these people create.