施蒂納生於巴伐利亞拜羅伊特,人們對他的生平知之甚少,為數不多的資料大多來自蘇格蘭裔德國作家約翰·亨利·麥凱(英語:John Henry Mackay)的一篇傳記(Max Stirner – sein Leben und sein Werk)。施蒂納是阿爾貝特·克里斯蒂安·海因里希·施密特(1769–1807)和索菲婭·埃萊諾拉·賴因萊因(1778–1839)的獨子。施蒂納的父親於1807年4月19日死於結核病,年僅37歲[15]。1809年,施蒂納的母親與海因里希·巴勒施泰特(一位藥劑師)再婚,隨後定居於西普魯士庫爾姆(今屬波蘭海烏姆諾)。施蒂納20歲那年求學於柏林洪堡大學[15],他在洪堡大學主修語文學、哲學和神學。大學期間他曾多次參加格奧爾格·威廉·弗里德里希·黑格爾有關哲學史、宗教哲學和主觀精神的講座,黑格爾後來也成為了他思想的靈感來源之一[16]。施蒂納後來去了埃朗根-紐倫堡大學,與路德維希·安德列斯·費爾巴哈同期在該校學習[17]。
1842年6月14日,施蒂納在《萊茵報》再度發表《論藝術和宗教》(Kunst und Religion)一文。施蒂納主要在該文中針對布魯諾·鮑威爾和鮑威爾反對黑格爾的文章《從信仰的觀點批判黑格爾的宗教與藝術的學說》進行批駁。鮑威爾通過聲稱藝術與哲學間的關係比藝術與宗教的關係要密切得多——因為它們具有相同的決定性和明確性,而且有共同的倫理根源——反駁了黑格爾認定的藝術和宗教之間的關係。但施蒂納超越了二人的觀點,指出假設藝術確實為哲學創造了一個對象,那麼就藝術就決不可能與哲學有關,而施蒂納的這種想法與鮑威爾和黑格爾二人的理論體系都對立:
《反動的歷史》(Geschichte der Reaktion)於1851年由全德出版公司(Allgemeine Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt)出版,隨即立即被奧地利當局查禁[15]。該書的寫作背景基於當時剛結束的德意志1848年革命,主要內容實際上來自於施蒂納挑選並翻譯他人的作品所組成的合集。引言和一些補充段落由施蒂納本人所寫。施蒂納在書中引用了埃德蒙·伯克和奧古斯特·孔德二人的著作以展示二人對於革命的對立看法。
施蒂納的著作並沒有被當時的其他哲學家所忽略。施蒂納對各類意識形態的攻擊——尤其是對於費爾巴哈的人文主義——迫使費爾巴哈陷入了十分窘迫的境地,為此費爾巴哈曾多次與施蒂納論戰。莫澤斯·赫斯(當時是馬克思的摯友)和塞利加·維什努(布魯諾·鮑威爾的擁護者弗朗茨·齊克林·馮·齊克林斯基(德語:Franz Zychlin von Zychlinski)的筆名)等人亦寫文回應了施蒂納,施蒂納後來於1845年9月再次發表《施蒂納的評論者》一文回應幾人,同時在文中對讀者感興趣的幾個問題進行了澄清——尤其是關於該書與費爾巴哈的關係相關的問題。
雖然《唯一者及其所有物》一度在學界大受歡迎,並招來眾多知名哲學家評判,但該書在施蒂納去世前一度絕版多年,同樣,施蒂納生前由它所引發的惡名沒過幾年就已消失殆盡[59]。施蒂納對左翼黑格爾派的理論體系產生了破壞性的影響,他的哲學觀(英語:Philosophy of Max Stirner)也激發了馬克思對他進行批判,《唯一者及其所有物》最終也成為了個人無政府主義的開創性文本之一[59]。埃德蒙德·胡塞爾曾在講座中警告聽眾《唯一者及其所有物》具有「一種誘惑力」,不過他未曾在他的文章中提到這一點[60]。藝術評論家、施蒂納的推崇者赫伯特·里德(英語:Herbert Read)經過觀察後認為,《唯一者及其所有物》自第一次被印刷後一直「哽在西方文化的喉頭」[61]。
Nyberg, Svein Olav. The union of egoists(PDF). Non Serviam (Oslo, Norway: Svein Olav Nyberg): 13–14. [2012-09-01]. OCLC 47758413. (原始內容(PDF)存檔於2010-12-07).
Moggach, Douglas and De Ridder, Widukind. "Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia, 1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought". In: Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents, ed. Lisa Herzog (pp. 71–92). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 82–83.
"Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia, 1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought.", In: Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents, ed. Lisa Herzog (pp. 71–92). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, p. 75.
"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. 90 (2011).
"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).
"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).
"The long revolution is preparing to write works in the ink of action whose unknown or nameless authors will flock to join Sade, Fourier, Babeuf, Marx, Lacenaire, Stirner, Lautréamont, L'hautier, Vaillant, Henry, Villa, Zapata, Makhno, the Communards, the insurrectionaries of Hamburg, Kiel, Kronstadt, Asturias – all those who have not yet played their last card in a game which we have only just joined: the great gamble whose stake is freedom". Raoul Vaneigem. The Revolution of Everyday Life.
"Only the influence of the German philosopher of egoism, Max Stirner (né Johann Kaspar Schmidt, 1806–1856), as expressed through The Ego and His Own (Der Einzige und sein Eigentum) compared with that of Proudhon. In adopting Stirnerite egoism (1886), Tucker rejected natural rights which had long been considered the foundation of libertarianism. This rejection galvanized the movement into fierce debates, with the natural rights proponents accusing the egoists of destroying libertarianism itself. So bitter was the conflict that a number of natural rights proponents withdrew from the pages of Liberty in protest even though they had hitherto been among its frequent contributors. Thereafter, Liberty championed egoism although its general content did not change significantly". Wendy Mcelroy. "Benjamin Tucker, Individualism, & Liberty: Not the Daughter but the Mother of Order"互聯網檔案館的存檔,存檔日期2011-05-24..
卡爾·亨利希·烏爾利克斯曾於1870年創辦了同性戀報紙《普羅米修斯》,但只發行了一期。見:Kennedy, Hubert, Karl Heinrich Ulrichs: First Theorist of Homosexuality, In: 'Science and Homosexualities', ed. Vernon Rosario. New York: Routledge, 1997, pp. 26–45.
"Human or divine, as Stirner said, the predicates are the same whether they belong analytically to the divine being, or whether they are synthetically bound to the human form" (Gilles Deleuze. The Logic of Sense. Continuum. 2004). p. 122.
Albert Levy, Stirner and Nietzsche, Paris, 1904; Robert Schellwien, Max Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche, 1892; H.L. Mencken, The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche, 1908; K. Löwith, From Hegel To Nietzsche New York, 1964, p. 187; R. A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in Modern Philology, Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 24–37; T. A. Riley, "Anti-Statism in German Literature, as Exemplified by the Work of John Henry Mackay", in PMLA, Vol. 62, No. 3, September 1947, pp. 828–843; Seth Taylor, Left Wing Nietzscheans, The Politics of German Expressionism 1910–1920, p. 144, 1990, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York; Gilles Deleuze, Nietzsche et la Philosophy, Presses Universitaires de France, 1962; R. C. Solomon and K. M. Higgins, The Age of German Idealism, p. 300, Routledge, 1993.
While discussion of possible influence has never ceased entirely, the period of most intense discussion occurred between 1892 and 1900 in the German-speaking world. During this time, the most comprehensive account of Nietzsche's reception in the German language, the 4-volume work of Richard Frank Krummel called Nietzsche und der deutsche Geist, indicates 83 entries discussing Stirner and Nietzsche. The only thinker more frequently discussed in connection with Nietzsche during this time is Schopenhauer, with about twice the number of entries. Discussion steadily declines thereafter, but it is still significant. Nietzsche and Stirner show 58 entries between 1901 and 1918. From 1919 to 1945, there are 28 entries regarding Nietzsche and Stirner.
"Apart from the information which can be gained from the annotations, the library (and the books Nietzsche read) shows us the extent, and the bias, of Nietzsche's knowledge of many fields, such as evolution and cosmology. Still more obvious, the library shows us the extent and the bias of Nietzsche's knowledge about many persons to whom he so often refers with ad hominem statements in his works. This includes not only such important figures as Mill, Kant, and Pascal but also such minor ones (for Nietzsche) as Max Stirner and William James who are both discussed in books Nietzsche read". T. H. Brobjer, "Nietzsche's Reading and Private Library", 1885–1889, in Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 58, No. 4, October 1997, pp. 663–693; Stack believes it is doubtful that Nietzsche read Stirner, but notes "he was familiar with the summary of his theory he found in Lange's history." George J. Stack, Lange and Nietzsche, Walter de Gruyter, 1983, p. 276.
Eduard von Hartmann, Nietzsches "neue Moral", in Preussische Jahrbücher, 67. Jg., Heft 5, May 1891, S. 501–521; augmented version with more express reproach of plagiarism in: Ethische Studien, Leipzig, Haacke 1898, pp. 34–69.
This author believes that one should be careful in comparing the two men. However, he notes: "It is this intensive nuance of individualism that appeared to point from Nietzsche to Max Stirner, the author of the remarkable work Der Einzige und sein Eigentum. Stirner's influence in modern Germany has assumed astonishing proportions, and moves in general parallel with that of Nietzsche. The two thinkers are regarded as exponents of essentially the same philosophy." O. Ewald, "German Philosophy in 1907", in The Philosophical Review, Vol. 17, No. 4, July 1908, pp. 400–426.
[in the last years of the nineteenth century] "The question of whether Nietzsche had read Stirner was the subject of great debate" R.A. Nicholls, "Beginnings of the Nietzsche Vogue in Germany", in Modern Philology, Vol. 56, No. 1, August 1958, pp. 29–30.
"Stirner, like Nietzsche, who was clearly influenced by him, has been interpreted in many different ways," Saul Newman, From Bakunin to Lacan: Anti-authoritarianism and the Dislocation of Power, Lexington Books, 2001, p. 56; "We do not even know for sure that Nietzsche had read Stirner. Yet, the similarities are too striking to be explained away." R. A. Samek, The Meta Phenomenon, p. 70, New York, 1981; Tom Goyens, (referring to Stirner's book The Ego and His Own) "The book influenced Friedrich Nietzsche, and even Marx and Engels devoted some attention to it." T. Goyens, Beer and Revolution: The German Anarchist Movement In New York City, p. 197, Illinois, 2007.
"We have every reason to suppose that Nietzsche had a profound knowledge of the Hegelian movement, from Hegel to Stirner himself. The philosophical learning of an author is not assessed by the number of quotations, nor by the always fanciful and conjectural check lists of libraries, but by the apologetic or polemical directions of his work itself." Gilles Deleuze (translated by Hugh Tomlinson), Nietzsche and Philosophy, 1962 (2006 reprint, pp. 153–154).
Guido Giacomo Preparata, "Perishable Money in a Threefold Commonwealth: Rudolf Steiner and the Social Economics of an Anarchist Utopia". Review of Radical Economics 38/4 (Fall 2006). pp. 619–648.
Max Stirner's 'Der Einzige und sein Eigentum' im Spiegel der zeitgenössischen deutschen Kritik. Eine Textauswahl (1844–1856). Hg. Kurt W. Fleming. Leipzig: Verlag Max-Stirner-Archiv 2001 (Stirneriana (頁面存檔備份,存於互聯網檔案館)).
Arena, Leonardo V., Note ai margini del nulla, ebook, 2013.
Arvon, Henri, Aux Sources de l'existentialisme, Paris: P.U.F. 1954.
Essbach, Wolfgang, Gegenzüge. Der Materialismus des Selbst. Eine Studie über die Kontroverse zwischen Max Stirner und Karl Marx. Frankfurt: Materialis 1982.
Helms, Hans G, Die Ideologie der anonymen Gesellschaft. Max Stirner 'Einziger' und der Fortschritt des demokratischen Selbstbewusstseins vom Vormärz bis zur Bundesrepublik, Köln: Du Mont Schauberg, 1966.
Koch, Andrew M., "Max Stirner: The Last Hegelian or the First Poststructuralist". In: Anarchist Studies, vol. 5 (1997) pp. 95–108.
Laska, Bernd A., Ein dauerhafter Dissident. Eine Wirkungsgeschichte des Einzigen, Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1996 (TOC, index (頁面存檔備份,存於互聯網檔案館)).
Laska, Bernd A., Ein heimlicher Hit. Editionsgeschichte des "Einzigen". Nürnberg: LSR-Verlag 1994 (abstract (頁面存檔備份,存於互聯網檔案館)).
Marshall, Peter H. "Max Stirner" in "Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism "(London: HarperCollins, 1992).
Moggach, Douglas; De Ridder, Widukind, "Hegelianism in Restoration Prussia,1841–1848: Freedom, Humanism and 'Anti-Humanism' in Young Hegelian Thought". In: Herzog, Lisa (ed.): Hegel's Thought in Europe: Currents, Crosscurrents and Undercurrents. Basingstoke and New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 71–92 (Google Books (頁面存檔備份,存於互聯網檔案館)).
Newman, Saul (ed.), Max Stirner (Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought), Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 (full book (頁面存檔備份,存於互聯網檔案館)).
Newman, Saul, Power and Politics in Poststructural Thought. London and New York: Routledge 2005.
Stepelevich, Lawrence S., Ein Menschenleben. Hegel and Stirner". In: Moggach, Douglas (ed.): The New Hegelians. Philosophy and Politics in the Hegelian School. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 166–176.
Welsh, John F. Max Stirner's Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation. Lexington Books. 2010.
Di Mascio, Carlo, Stirner Giuspositivista. Rileggendo l'Unico e la sua proprietà, 2 ed., Edizioni Del Faro, Trento, 2015, p. 253, ISBN978-88-6537-378-1.