A Point of View...Roger Scruton

[Beef Oven!]

The Scruton/tobacco piece was very old (2002?) but it does seem to be a very odd pursuit for an 'academic, intellectual, philosopher'. He doesn't come over to me as someone who is normally objective and balanced in his views. He's certainly opinionated and I see no reason why he should not express those opinions wherever and whenever he wishes. Whether those opinions are any more valid than, say, mine, just because he's an academic, intellectual and philosopher, I'm not sure. It's just that I don't expect to be paid for spouting my opinions (oh, and don't get paid either).

I think it's unethical to canvas for smoking when one knows the harm it does. Bad call - there's other ways to make money.

His 'opinions' are very objective and well-reasoned. There is something compelling about the way he presents his ideas (many of which I don't agree with).

[Barbirollians]

The Scruton/tobacco piece was very old (2002?) but it does seem to be a very odd pursuit for an 'academic, intellectual, philosopher'. He doesn't come over to me as someone who is normally objective and balanced in his views. He's certainly opinionated and I see no reason why he should not express those opinions wherever and whenever he wishes. Whether those opinions are any more valid than, say, mine, just because he's an academic, intellectual and philosopher, I'm not sure. It's just that I don't expect to be paid for spouting my opinions (oh, and don't get paid either).

Other Scruton comments set out here - odious and bigoted seem to me to be spot on

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/theresa-may-roger-scruton-no-such-thing-date-rape

[Beef Oven!]

Other Scruton comments set out here - odious and bigoted seem to me to be spot on

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham...hing-date-rape

That's not an example of being bigoted. It would seem that you don't understand what the word means. It's odious though, in my opinion.

[french frank]

That's not an example of being bigoted. It would seem that you don't understand what the word means. It's odious though, in my opinion.

'Obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion'. I think that, arguably, that might apply to several of Scruton's beliefs.

[Beef Oven!]

'Obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion'. I think that, arguably, that might apply to several of Scruton's beliefs.

It might apply to several of anyone's beliefs!

I still believe Spurs can win the premiership, even though today they got drubbed 4-2 by Arsenal. I'm a bigot!

[Barbirollians]

'Obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion'. I think that, arguably, that might apply to several of Scruton's beliefs.

Absolutely - he is man who considers his own opinion to be fact - which for a philosopher is rather scary.

I didn’t even get on to his homophobia and Islamophobia.

[Beef Oven!]

Absolutely - he is man who considers his own opinion to be fact - which for a philosopher is rather scary.

I didn’t even get on to his homophobia and Islamophobia.

Why are you rushing to all the dirt you can find on the man? I'm sure you didn't even listen to his talk as linked in the OP. He's a witch - Burn him! The hysteria that gets unleashed in here! It's people like you who are scary.

[Serial_Apologist]

Why are you rushing to all the dirt you can find on the man? I'm sure you didn't even listen to his talk as linked in the OP. He's a witch - Burn him! The hysteria that gets unleashed in here! It's people like you who are scary.

I will have another listen. But the way you are defending Scruton makes me think of a fugitive who's desperately running away from his own arguments and finding anything, anything, to throw in the path of his pursuers.

[Beef Oven!]

I will have another listen. But the way you are defending Scruton makes me think of a fugitive who's desperately running away from his own arguments and finding anything, anything, to throw in the path of his pursuers.

You have a vivid imagination.

[Serial_Apologist]

You have a vivid imagination.

I wish...........

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

His 'opinions' are very objective and well-reasoned.

Not on Music - he not infrequently gets his facts wrong; Bryn's post #38 gave one example. Another was his attempt to "disqualify" the conclusion of the Fourth S4tet of Schoenberg, on the grounds that he could hear no reason why the particular chord with which the work ends was chosen by the composer as a conclusion - this is not an "objective" reason, it is a subjective one - as is his favouring playing Baroque on Twentieth Century instruments. Nowt wrong, of course, with subjective opinions, but he presents them as facts - he's just a more verbose Bernard Michael O'Hanlon, but with fewer laughs. There is little essential difference between Scruton's idea of Music and those of, for example, Julius Korngold a hundred years ago - not understanding the developments that have resulted in the Music he doesn't like, he seeks to use the aesthetics of that which he does as universal criteria in an attempt to discredit it. This is no more "well-reasoned" than a Creationist arguing Biblical texts to "argue" against Evolution.

Even on Music that he is enthusiastic about, his writings tend to avoid discussing the Music itself; aspects of rhythm, melody, texture, orchestration, tonality are very superficially discussed, instead, the focus is on how the Music makes him feel, how it illuminates the text, and how the text illuminates the ideas of the philosophical writings that Wagner admired. This is not surprising - Scruton's is a student of philosophy, after all - but the recurrent concentration on Death makes for a very myopic overview (for me) of Wagner's work - an overview I find repellent, rather than "compelling". The necrophilia that emerges from Scruton's writings diminishes Wagner's achievement - if all that Tristan achieved was a declaration that life and love are just phases in the movement towards the ultimate consummation of death, then I wouldn't be in the slightest interested in it as a a work of Art. (For a fuller overview from a philosophy point of view, Bryan Magee is a much better, more well-reasoned writer.)

But ultimately, Scruton has nothing compelling to offer creative and practising Artists, who get on with the business of making Music regardless of what he has to say about them; he is literally irrelevant to them. The best he has to look forward to is his writings being quoted in future studies of the aesthetics of late 20th/early 21st Century in the same way that Hanslick (a much greater Musical mind) is cited in studies of Wagner.

[Beef Oven!]

He is very clear in his opinions and does not present them as facts. What he does is gives his view objectively (e.g. I like chocolate is an objective statement) and then reasons them. Nowt wrong with that. And he does say as much as needs to be said about rhythm, melody, texture, orchestration, tonality etc. He is not presenting his arguments as a musicologist, he does so as a listener. Reasoning on how the 'music makes him feel, how it illuminates the text, and how the text illuminates the ideas of the philosophical writings that Wagner admired' is all strength to his elbow, I'd say.

[Bryn]

Keep digging. We could do with more geothermal exploration. Just where does he reason his assertion that John Cage composed 4'33" "with no prior evidence of musical competence"? He doesn't.

[Beef Oven!]

Keep digging. We could do with more geothermal exploration. Just where does he reason his assertion that John Cage composer 4'33" "with no prior evidence of musical competence"? He doesn't.

I'm not digging. You're digging, looking for dirt on the guy. I am simply responding to posts. You are repeating yourself about Cage. We heard you the first time. Stop digging.

[Bryn]

I'm not digging. You're digging, looking for dirt on the guy. I am simply responding to posts. You are repeating yourself about Cage. We heard you the first time. Stop digging.

Answer the question. Where does he reason his assertion that John Cage composed 4'33" "with no prior evidence of musical competence"?