[ 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: 397 KB, 1600x1067, 34E86AD0-413A-41DE-A2FE-68DE835908C0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18400870 No.18400870 [Reply] [Original]

Is he worth a minute of my time? I always see him in YouTube recommended thumbnails and he looks like a tv hack

>> No.18400882

>an anglo hack
FTFY

>> No.18401052

>>18400870
You would have got more posts if you didn't use an image of him 30 feet from the camera

>> No.18401219

He's used by YouTube deradicalisation algorithm. I wouldn't really say he's worthwhile desu.

>> No.18401474

>>18400870
The last great conservative academic.

>> No.18401485
File: 32 KB, 564x662, 1622379586953.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18401485

>>18401219
>YouTube deradicalisation algorithm
i wouldnt be surprised if this was a real thing lol

>> No.18401491

sorry but I'm convinced that aesthetics is a mostly worthless field filled with pretentious pseuds

>> No.18403401

>>18401485
It absolutely is. Scrutton, Hoover institute stuff, to some degree Prager, Jordan Peterson, Douglas Murray, some time ago even Victor Davis Hanson(not anymore since like 2018 for some reason I don't know) etc. will always get recommended if you watch any right wing content.

>> No.18403447

>>18401219
>implying that radicalism is the way
In medio stat virtus.

>> No.18403559

>>18400870
He's a liberal.

>> No.18403622

>>18400870
nah. Scruton was a popular media conservative figure; that ought to tell you he appeals to midwits. He's not a great thinker, but he looks and sounds like someone important.

If you want some good apologetics for western civilization, read some good Catholic philosophers. Gilson, maybe, or Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body.

>> No.18403645

>>18400870
he's pretty influential in aesthetics, if you have any interest in aesthetics i would say he's not only worth your time but mandatory. i say this as someone who mostly agrees with >>18401491 and dislikes his opinions. he has some things to say in ethics and political philosophy but they're not as important; easily skippable
>>18403622
you are a joke

>> No.18403658

>>18403622
Gilson is based but fuck off namefag

>> No.18403836
File: 181 KB, 1024x904, 16488211.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18403836

>>18403447
Was I warned because of a Latin expression?

>> No.18404398

>>18400870
He’s garbage. A neocon pundit same as Peterson and Douglas Murray as this anon said >>18403401. The point of these people is to create “content” to bolster the ideology of think tanks like the Hoover institute. This keeps the political overton window constrained to liberal democracy, and limits discussion to unimportant social disputes like “critical race theory.” Needless to say, Scruton is disposable, and will quickly be rightfully forgotten.

>> No.18404414

that seems like a really comfy writing/reading room desu. want

>> No.18404428

>>18404398
He is an extremely respected philosopher with 44 articles in the SEP ranging from aesthetics to politics. Open up any aesthetic philosophy textbook and you will find his name there. To even compare him to Peterson/Murray just shows how pseud you are

>> No.18404471

>>18404428
>respected philosopher
Well memed

>> No.18404474

>>18404471
bait

>> No.18404781

>>18403645
This Anon got it. Worth for Aesthetics. Garbage on everything else.

>> No.18404819

Only sub-human peasants don't read Scruton.

>> No.18404823

>>18403836
The janny is off the hook lately, they want to keep this board English only

>> No.18404829

>>18400870
If you want to read nostalgic tales about the English countryside I suppose yes, if not, stay away

>> No.18404879

>>18404428
> He is an extremely respected philosopher
By who? Neocon think tanks?
>Open up any aesthetic philosophy textbook and you will find his name there.
I doubt that, if you have proof provide it. His “aesthetics” boil down to a crude polemic against postmodernism where he fails to provide a systematic refutation of postmodern philosophy. All his work is a veiled defense of limp-wristed conservatism. Nothing he says hasn’t already been written before him.

If you want a true refutation of postmodernism I suggest the book Hermeneutics as Politics by Stanley Rosen. It’s rigorous philosophy tho, not pop stuff like scruton.

>> No.18404899

>>18404879
>By who? Neocon think tanks?
The fact that you don't know what the SEP is just shows you are out of your league and you shouldn't take any positions but start reading more philosophy.
>I doubt that, if you have proof provide it.
Go on amazon right now. Look up aesthetic textbook and search for Scruton. I have 8 normal textbooks on my bookshelf and 7 of them have Scruton.

>> No.18404915

>>18404899
>I have 8 normal textbooks on my bookshelf and 7 of them have Scruton.
Post pics coward

>> No.18404954

>>18404879
>His “aesthetics” boil down to a crude polemic against postmodernism where he fails to provide a systematic refutation of postmodern philosophy

You've read none of his books cover to cover. Stop pretending you have.
All you did was watch a shit documentary produced for the masses. Admit it.

>> No.18404985

>>18404954
>You've read none of his books cover to cover. Stop pretending you have.
I don’t need to. I read enough and got his whole schtick quickly enough. That’s easy to do when the writer is shallow. If my judgment of him is incorrect then please, explain what’s so brilliant about his theory of aesthetics.

>> No.18405017

>>18404915
I only have 5 Aesthetic textbooks on my current shelf but I'm not lying I have 3 in the attic but I'm not going up to get them. I do have like 15 books about aesthetics that aren't textbooks on my shelf though

>> No.18405019

>>18404985
>If my judgment of him is incorrect then please, explain what’s so brilliant about his theory of aesthetics.
Obvious bait. You have never read anything by him so you are just posting this so I post something for you to work your bait off. I'm not stupid. You can't bullshit an autistic

>> No.18405030

>>18405017
I went through Amazon, didn’t find any “aesthetics textbooks” citing scruton. Post some of yours.
>>18405019
No argument I see

>> No.18405059

>>18405030
Look up aesthetics. All the top books include Scruton in them.

Aesthetics An Introduction to the Philosophy of Art Shepehrd
Philosophy of the Arts: An Introduction to Aesthetics Gordon Graham
Aesthetics A Comprehensive Anthology
Aesthetics The Classic Readings.

These are the ones that come on Amazon. I know you’re baiting but this is just for future reference/people reading. Oxford’s printed bibliography for aesthetics has Scruton books recommended. Everyone who knows philosophy knows the SEP where he has 44 entries. Philpapers has this

“The two pre-20thcentury works that have had the greatest impact on contemporary discussions in aesthetics probably areHume 1757andKant 2005. 20thcentury works that have had a considerable impact includeGoodman 1968,Wollheim 1971,Walton 1970,Scruton 1983, andWalton 1990, a
"