[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 37 KB, 485x339, Roger-Scruton.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11651735 No.11651735 [Reply] [Original]

Anyone else find this guy hard to read? I've had my IQ tested by public schools officials and scored at 130, but I find his books difficult to read and understand. I like his style of English, but it's almost like reading Shakespeare: my mind is unused to the quality of the language and stalls. I regularly have to reread things I've just read, which never happens to me when I read Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, etc.

>> No.11651749

His documentary on aesthethics (beauty) is honestly a must watch for anyone critical of contemporary society, it is brilliant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHw4MMEnmpc

>> No.11651755

>>11651749
yeah I saw this when it came out, really well done for a 1 hr normie TV documentary.

>> No.11651774

>>11651735
>I've had my IQ tested by public schools officials and scored at 130
If you think IQ matters in any way, then I guess I don't wonder why you can't understand books.

>> No.11651785

>>11651749
I cannot stand his central notion that beauty is a value in itself, distinct from truth and goodness. It leads me to think there must be something deeply corrupted in his way of thinking if he does not see how deeply and ontologically related these things are - beauty is truth, and truth is goodness. With that in mind, it becomes senseless to make a program which attempts to describe the fortunes of beauty as distinct from truth and goodness in the development of art. The only way to understand the relation of 20th century art to beauty is to understand its relationship to truth and goodness. To do anything else is a nonstarter. But that then involves taking very seriously the First World War, and Freud, and Marx, and this Scruton cannot e bothered to do, so he just spends an hour going "Oh isn't this old thing beautiful? Oh, isn't this new thing ugly?"

>> No.11651790

>>11651774
t. 105er

>> No.11651799

>>11651735
This dudes got way better hair than me, and I'm 50 years younger.

>> No.11651838

>>11651785
The truth is often horrifying and ugly which already breaks your new age holistic blend, a flaw you might have located yourself if only you weren't the type to insist on the seriousness of Freudo-Marxian aesthetics.

>> No.11651843

>>11651785
Freud and Marx were Jews, retard. Try the fucking redpill

>> No.11651847

>>11651785
>this entire post
yikes

>> No.11651852

>>11651847
yikes

>> No.11651853

>>11651843
>Freud and Marx were Jews, retard
Such bittersweet irony, but please go back to your containment board.

>> No.11651854

>>11651847
This. Love seeing BASED Scruton BTFO SJWs

>> No.11651855

>>11651735
No, I find his style clear and accessible, but I read a lot of English writers and have grown used to their syntactic habits.

>> No.11651859

>>11651735
>Anyone else find this guy hard to read? I've had my IQ tested by public schools officials and scored at 130, but I find his books difficult to read and understand. I like his style of English, but it's almost like reading Shakespeare: my mind is unused to the quality of the language and stalls. I regularly have to reread things I've just read, which never happens to me when I read Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, etc.
Is this a copypasta?
>>11651749
Lmao at this documentary
>The music is too loud :(
>The pub is not like it used to be
>Why is there graffiti on the train

Stop shilling this cuckservative English butt bandito here. /pol/ is the containment board for 16 year olds who discovered Jordan Peterson and saying nigger 6 months ago

>> No.11651864

>>11651838
>The truth is often horrifying
This is no more an insightful observation that when people say "It feels so wrong but yet it feels so right"

>which already breaks your new age holistic blend
Nothing new age about it, I'm afraid; quite the contrary.

>> No.11651866

>>11651859
bebold, the shitposter. largest post in the thread and the most meaningless

>> No.11651874

>>11651864
>it was so obvious even I could have already thought of it!
yes your neoneoplatonist synthesis is going to be the next big thing i can feel it

>> No.11651885

>>11651874
Literally what?

>> No.11651890

>>11651866
no you're right I should EPICALLY use FACTS and LAWGIK to deconstruct a post pushing a tobacco industry shill's baby boomer hot takes on "why the period where I was young was the best time in human history." Don't worry eventually you'll move on from Scruton, start pretending to read Evola and somewhere along the line call yourself an "anarcho-monarchist" or something

>> No.11651895

>>11651890
>a tobacco industry shill
I don't know why this isn't brought up more. It's such a morally debased thing to do, and yet his entire professional scthick is being the morally pure vanguard of tradition, judging the degeneracy of an age.

>> No.11651898

>>11651890
WE REPRESENT TRADITIONAL BELIEFS HERE, I.E. KEEPING RACES SEPARATE, HAVING WOMEN BE SUBSERVIANT TO THE WHITE MAN, AND NO FEMALE PROMISCUITY.
Roger Scuton supports our views. If you can't handle it, then you shouldn't be here. We're not going to change our opinions when we see the world burning around us, women running around with apes instead of us, and degeneracy running rampant

>> No.11651908
File: 10 KB, 235x211, 1526909655472.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11651908

>>11651890

>> No.11651915

>>11651890
Is this the your brain on nigger cock?

>> No.11651919

>>11651898
>>11651908
>>11651915
Good to know OP doesn't sincerely believe this gay shit and is instead taking us on a ruse cruise. Also nice samefagging

>> No.11651926

>>11651919
>let me shit up your thread with shitposting
>fuck off samefags i'm right
(you)

>> No.11651940

>>11651926
Come on buddy its a school night haven't you got a modern world to revolt against in the morning? I'm sure your English teacher is looking forward to another based and redpilled spiel from you about how uncle toms cabin is cultural marxism

>> No.11651952

>>11651940
is it possible for you to say anything without resorting to complete cliches or are you really that stupid you feel satisfied with your post quality?

>> No.11651953

>>11651735
>IQ

>> No.11651957

>>11651953
>cope

>> No.11651959

>>11651953
t. 50IQ

>> No.11651960

>>11651952
I've had my IQ tested by public schools officials and scored at 135 so you should defer to your betters, faggot teen

>> No.11651962
File: 57 KB, 485x339, 1534749009656.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11651962

>heh...Metallica...now that was a band, not like them degenerate musics they have these days..

>> No.11651985
File: 48 KB, 2000x2000, 1533823614758.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11651985

my IQ is 160

>> No.11652096

>>11651785
So nice boobs and ass == truth
Your mom =/= truth

>> No.11652119

>>11651960
then how come you can't come up with a coherent way of expressing your disagreement with someone

>> No.11652138
File: 88 KB, 800x573, tobacco.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11652138

>>11651895
From 1500 until the 1970s, tobacco impacted the development and progression of Western Civilization, with most significant figures being tobacco smokers. There isn't a contradiction between tobacco smoking and traditionalism. Nearly half a millennium of cultural impact is enough to warrant some sort of endearment to it, even if it is harmful.
I occasionally buy some pipe tobacco and a cheap corn cob, and as I smoke, ponder when this vestige will be confined to the yards of a few backyard hobbyists or the pages of history altogether.

Tobacco being inherently harmful, at least as a carcinogen, remains an unsettled issue. In the experimental studies involving healthy animals, the tobacco group fails to exhibit carcinogenesis at statistically significant rates above control. This of course contradicts the epidemiological studies.
William Whitby's books provide a critical examination of the epidemiological studies. Indeed they're old books but their criticism applies to the studies of today as the design and methodology and reliance purely on epidemiological studies remains the same. At the very least, it's interesting to examine and temporarily entertain criticism of anti-smoking narratives because it's such rare stance.

http://wispofsmoke.net/PDFs/Whitby.pdf
https://www.scribd.com/document/44685607/Smoking-is-Good-for-You-William-T-Whitby

The reason people are fundamentally uncomfortable with tobacco is because it is associated with death, which brings one to ponder mortality, their own and of others. Life, much like cigar in hand, has a beginning and an end; the smoke created will fade. You can quantify the years all you like but no matter what you do, it will end. The question of buying a few years is irrelevant when confronting this unpleasant reality, and is just an attempt to sweep our looming impermanence under the rug. Memento mori.

>> No.11652147

>>11652119
how come your thread shit

>> No.11652172

>>11651895
>>11652138
Yeah, I really don't see what's wrong with him earning an income advocating for tobacco. You're probably an American city-dweller who is obsessed with optimal health

>> No.11652258

>>11652172
Because he did it on the sly. He was writing pro-smoking articles without disclosing the fact that they were paid advertisements by his benefactors. He was literally a shill for the Tobacco Internet Defence Force and misleading people. It is a totally dishonest thing to do and the episode reveals his true character, i.e. someone who will write whatever makes him money. So much for morals and virtue
>You're probably an American city-dweller who is obsessed with optimal health
What is the desirable lifestyle here? A rural person who loves to poison his body for no fucking reason? I smoke occasionally myself but the whole mouth and gum cancer thing is good enough reason to not be an advocate, or habitual user

>> No.11652276

>>11652258
I think you'd have to demonstrate that he hadn't been writing pro-smoking articles prior to his membership on a smoking corporation's payroll. Otherwise it's no different from a leftwing journalist receiving money from a Soros fund, which many of them do.

Regarding his character, he was recently knighted in recognition for his services to British philosophy but also for his efforts in supporting dissidents in Eastern Europe during the USSR, a service for which he was arrested and expelled from several Warsaw pact countries. In light of this I don't think he can be thought of as a financial opportunist.

>> No.11652290

>>11652276
>Otherwise it's no different from a leftwing journalist receiving money from a Soros fund, which many of them do.
Ok lets say its equivalent, I don't care they're both wrong and shouldn't do it.
>Regarding his character, he was recently knighted
So was Elton John
>also for his efforts in supporting dissidents in Eastern Europe during the USSR, a service for which he was arrested and expelled from several Warsaw pact countries
Whether he knew it or not he was probably on a CIA payroll. Actually genuinely very likely

>> No.11652294

>>11652290
>people get money from other people this is intrinsically evil
what are you some kind of pastoral anarchist?

>> No.11652297

>>11651962
good post

>> No.11652304

>>11652294
>people shouldn't be paid to push corporate or other agendas from dubious sources
>must be an anarchist
I'm sorry but your boy, who was no doubt fond of tobaccy to begin with, volunteered to try astroturf a pro-tobacco position
>In a leaked email to Japan Tobacco International seeking a £1,000 rise on his existing £4,500 monthly fee, Prof Scruton argued that in a business "largely conducted by shysters and sharks" he represented value for money.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/jan/24/advertising.tobaccoadvertising

>> No.11652323

>>11652304
The CIA fighting communism is a dubious source? Mind you I'm just indulging your paranoid hypothetical.

This stuff also all happened almost 20 years ago so I don't find it a particularly strong indictment of the man today.

>> No.11652350

>>11652323
>paranoid hypothetical
I'm Czech this isn't a hypothetical, trust me lmao. My parents setup a student liberal paper in the 80s only to years later find they were on a CIA payroll via proxy
>This stuff also all happened almost 20 years ago so I don't find it a particularly strong indictment of the man today.
ok well there is nothing more to be said then, I just think it was a revealing episode

>> No.11652379

>>11652350
your mother was raped by CIA agents and gave birth to you, you are a vile spawn of US imperialism and the only honorable thing to do is end it

>> No.11652553

>>11651898
>us
>we
>here
gtfo fucking faggot

>> No.11652559

the whole thread full of brainlets just as expected.

>> No.11652564

>>11652559
t.brainlet

>> No.11652655
File: 105 KB, 512x658, 1534617312467.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11652655

>>11651735
>Anyone else find this guy hard to read?
Nope, sorry. But then again, my IQ is 151 on the verbal/crystallised scale (and143 performance/fluid one).

>> No.11652657

>>11651898
Yes, truly! Thanks to all the brave 4channers out there, shielding us from todays boundless degeneracy. No one represents the voice of reason as well these days as you fat nerds, sitting on your fat ass all day fapping to BBC porn.

>> No.11652665

>>11651962
i love these memes

>> No.11652674

>>11651785
But beauty is objectively distinct from truth. My proof? Something untrue can be beautiful.

>> No.11652676

>>11652674
False.

>> No.11652703

>>11652676
You don't think any fiction is beautiful? Well, there goes every fictional classic. I guess you don't think paintings of events that never happened aren't beautiful either according to your views?

>> No.11652709

>>11652703
Fictive =/= false.

>> No.11652712

>>11652709
Fictive = untrue = false

>> No.11652714

>>11652712
Wrong.

>> No.11652715

>>11651735
>130 iq
lol brainlet

>> No.11652718

>>11652676
>>11652709
>>11652714
You can't just claim the opposite is right without any evidence. Right now your philosophy is so pathetic you can't even provide arguments against the most obvious responses to it.

>> No.11652725

>>11652718
Consult a dictionary you stupid nigger.

>> No.11652837

>>11652674
>Something untrue can be beautiful
That's not a proof, that's a simple denial. Witness the person who denied your denial.

>>11652703
>You don't think any fiction is beautiful? Well, there goes every fictional classic. I guess you don't think paintings of events that never happened aren't beautiful either according to your views?
Not the anon you were replying to, but the obvious idea would be that it is not that fiction isn't beautiful, it is that to the extent that it is beautiful it is also true. Or do you think there is no truth to be found in fiction?

>> No.11653017

>>11652703
>>11652712
>>11652718
Fiction is a product of imagination my dude. "Truth" and "falsehood" are deictic in fiction. Equating "truth" with "fact" is a sophomore's mistake. All facts are true, but not all that is true is a fact.

>> No.11654273

>>11651735
I find Scruton very sharp looking. Is he a twink?