A Point of View...Roger Scruton

[Beef Oven!]

Nice to find a fellow fan of Scruton. Even if you are not, well done on arguing one should play the ball rather than the man.

This is very much part of the problem that Roger outlines in the 10 minute talk.

[Beef Oven!]

I quite liked Aesthetics of Music even though I disagreed with quite a bit of it.

Me too. In fact your statement is good for my position on all the Roger Scruton Books that I've read. Nice to get a different view on things.

Apologies for the ad hominem but isn't Roger a bit like Nietzsche - an ok philosopher who over-reached himself when it came to music ?

There are a lot of composers who have overreached themselves on music and can't make a decent fist of philosophy!

[Bryn]

I do not have excessive enthusiasm for Roger, or an intense critical devotion. This is what political correctness can do to the most even-handed of members, such as yourself.

Your normal standards of fastidiousness have been suspended, temporarily, while you go through this acute episode of political correctness, I hope.

How did you manage to transmute "uncritical" into "critical" there? Is this what is popularly known as a Freudian slip, or did predictive text do it for you?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

This is very much part of the problem that Roger outlines in the 10 minute talk.

You are (both) absolutely correct in pointing out that little has been said about the talk - and I think the discussion has gone in a direction ardy might not have expected or wanted. My problem is that RS has p ... ut something other than vinegar on his chips so often in his comments (as demonstrated frequently on this Thread, the objections to many of which you have yourself agreed with) that I am reluctant in the extreme to accept one when he offers it.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Although Scruton argued consistently from his fundamental assumptions in AOM. , as you would expect him to do as a trained philosopher , I took issue with some of his fundamental assumptions.

[Beef Oven!]

How did you manage to transmute "uncritical" into "critical" there? Is this what is popularly known as a Freudian slip, or did predictive text do it for you?

I've no idea. But if it helps you to evade the point .........

[Beef Oven!]

Although Scruton argued consistently from his fundamental assumptions in AOM. , as you would expect him to do as a trained philosopher , I took issue with some of his fundamental assumptions.

What are the fundamental assumptions that he's making? I'm not picking up on it .....

[MrGongGong]

I for one would not agree with his views on gender etc, but they are hardly bigoted or odious. For example, compared to the position taken by Islam and Islamic influenced governments on such matters as gender, LGBT, rape, etc he is quite benign. But you, MrGG and fellow politically correct travellers won't be interested in that; you wouldn't dare accept the comparison - it's politically incorrect. Which neatly brings back to what the OP was about, after almost 80 posts of hysteria.

I've been looking for a good example of ill informed binary thinking for some time now
Thanks for this , most useful

At no point did Scrote (or folks here either) say what they meant by "political correctness" anyway
very weak and superficial

As he has styled himself as a writer on music (and the strange "institute" with the photo of the chap who was involved in Poundbury with Boston Stump in the background ?) it's perfectly fine to pull apart the nonsense he writes about it.

[Bryn]

I've no idea. But if it helps you to evade the point .........

No point evasion. My posting of the etymology of "fan" was in response to such fanaticism being attributed to you (by implication) by cmr_for3. You have now somewhat clarified the situation by your denial of fan status regarding Scruton, your contributions to this thread notwithstanding.

[Beef Oven!]

I've been looking for a good example of ill informed binary thinking for some time now
Thanks for this , most useful

The point is, you et al are very quick to go mad and shout about Trump, Roger Scruton and other targets that are acceptable to political correctness, but you won't say a dickie-bird about Islam, for example, which espouses the same 'odious' and 'bigoted' ideas about women, LGBT, same sex marriage etc. You are only interested in easy targets. Since you seek examples of binary thinking, I'll ask you - are you a coward or just short-sighted?

[french frank]

Although Scruton argued consistently from his fundamental assumptions in AOM. , as you would expect him to do as a trained philosopher , I took issue with some of his fundamental assumptions.

I think this is where I'm sceptical (if I may say so) too. 'Aesthetics' is theoretical: as such it cannot be based on a personal assumption of what 'beauty' is. This is where RS seems, in my view to fall down. Words like 'appealing' (not) and 'charlatan' are based on a subjective view.That is not critical.

[Beef Oven!]

No point evasion. My posting of the etymology of "fan" was in response to such fanaticism being attributed to you (by implication) by cmr_for3. You have now somewhat clarified the situation by your denial of fan status regarding Scruton, your contributions to this thread notwithstanding.

More diversionary tactics from the political correct mindset - Show me anything that I have said that gives me fan-status for Roger, and I will give you 15p for each one.

[Beef Oven!]

I think this is where I'm sceptical (if I may say so) too. 'Aesthetics' is theoretical: as such it cannot be based on a personal assumption of what 'beauty' is. This is where RS seems, in my view to fall down. Words like 'appealing' (not) and 'charlatan' are based on a subjective view.That is not critical.

N.B. 'Sceptica'l can mean must I believe, rather than can I believe, in this context.

[Bryn]

More diversionary tactics from the political[sic] correct mindset - Show me anything that I have said that gives me fan-status for Roger, and I will give you 15p for each one.

Pots and kettles notwithstanding, try number 9 for starters.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Just listened to RS's POV after Ferney's exhortation above. It is well argued and I think his plea for an end to the witch hunt culture , spurred by social media is a sensible one. His initial example - the hounding of Sir Tim Shaw - after remarks made at a conference about female scientists is a complex case . Sir Tim maintains his remarks were satirical and ironic something Scruton doesn't mention even though it helps his case . There were subsequent allegations that his comments were misrepresented and spun so as to portray them as outrageously sexist. The social media was response was damning and almost all from people who were not present at the event who thus had no idea of the context. This is the first important point that perhaps RS doesn't make enough of - the role of journalists ,and social media commentators in stirring things up , with inaccurate reportage.
He then moves on to talk about the difficulty of criticising elements of Islam without being accused of Islamaphobia. I am not so sure - I think most people can distinguish and point out strains of intolerance in Islam as they can within Chrisitanity without causing offence. In short I have heard many criticisms of Islam that have not been met with cries of Islamaphobia . The problem is that it is an inexact term - there is outright hatred of Muslims expressed both verbally and violently in our society and we should acknowledge that .
He then makes a lot of Rene Girard's observations on the scape-goating mechanism . I don't disagree with any of this but like a lot of anthropological theories it's just a theory - as a piece of descriptive analysis fair enough .
He ends with his recent hounding on social media following his appointment to the new building commission ( for those who have been following the thread a neat joining together of aesthetics and social media outrage ) and a plea for greater tolerance and understanding complete with a quote in Arabic from the Quran. To be honest I found little to disagree with BUT he fails to point out instances where political correctness might actually oil the wheels of a civilised society . By avoiding words that needlessly give offence that is surely a good thing. With the freedom to express as wide a range of views as possible must also come the responsibility not to inflame through causing gratuitous offence . Equally we should not be looking to be offended at every available opportunity .