Read on Twitter
This month, marking the one-year anniversary of his death, my twitter feed will be dedicated to the thought of Professor Sir Roger Scruton.
‘The metaphysical loneliness of the subject is not a historically transient condition. It is a human universal.’ - Scruton.
Most people know Scruton’s work through his thoughts on conservatism, which indeed is his most popular output. But the more one reads him, the more one realises that his most interesting thought is reserved for aesthetics and what has been termed ‘humane philosophy.’
Scruton’s own philosophical alignments have not been fully or adequately studied; @Scruton_Legacy and @HorcherF have done some initial and important work here. To what extent, for example, was he an Idealist? How far going is his commitment to philosophical modernism?
Scruton liked scholastic thought for its impressive systematisation, but saw it as a castle in the sky. Perhaps, one might say, he saw it as imagining away the pathos of the distance between the real and the ideal.
Another aspect that ought to be studied is the Catholic reception of Roger’s thought. He had much respect for the Church. Perhaps a conference someday? https://catholicherald.co.uk/roger-scruton-my-tribal-religion/
Scruton (influenced by Kant) said we can never quite reach outside of this world. It is as if we were standing by a window on our way up a staircase, looking out on the beautiful landscape beyond. He reminds us ‘we are prisoners of time and our steps trudge always onwards and up’
One must not forget Roger’s contribution to the history of philosophy, through his Kant monograph, introductions to issues in modern philosophy and history of modern philosophy from Descartes to Wittgenstein, which was my intro to his work at 16.
Also Spinoza or course, and all his books function as introductions to at least some aspect of the great tradition and its thinkers. He was not, as he says, a historian of ideas, but dealt with the history of philosophy. How does he measure up to other commentators?
I’m wondering how to do this; thematically, by book, bit of this bit of that? We shall see. One might also want to see my discussions with @HorcherF and @JOBengtsson, two thinkers in their own right who also have much insightful to say about Roger’s work.
There has been much interest in Scruton’s philosophy of religion, so I might return to this in the coming days. Feel free to ask questions as well and I will respond if I can.
Scruton is often criticised for his lack of commitment to ‘dogmatic Christianity,’ but I think it is rather unfair (why suppose that he must, given his own premises). As a Catholic indebtes to his thought, I try to vindicate some of his contributions.
Rather, perhaps one might say at least this much: Scruton attempted to show the religious impetus inherent in all of us, and to share its essential truths of Christianity to those who no longer think it possible to be religious or have not yet reached the shores of faith.
Mightn’t someone take the next step; for those of us who ARE religious, but struggle with the lofty promises of a certain type of metaphysics, in what way can we speak of religious experience? Here, I suggest, Scruton’s vocabulary and insights might be a point of departure.
In this context one finds a criticism in the form of ‘Scruton was great, but his Kantianism...’ Perhaps some of his great insights are BECAUSE of his Kantian leanings? I.e. one can justly criticise his debt to Kant, but without it, it wouldn’t be his philosophy (as we know it).
Think of his religious philosophy which relies on transcendental idealism, or his ethics in On Human Nature resting on Kantian premises, or indeed his aesthetic insights due at least in part to Kant.
In fact, I think it is no exaggeration to say Scruton is on of our times greatest Kant scholars and thinker in the Kantian tradition, alongside Allison, Höffner, Körner, Insole etc.
Scruton’s Religious Philosophy could be read as a type of apophatic thought. In ‘Notes,’ I believe, he has one character say this: ‘our world contains an absence, and we must love that absence, for that is the way to love God.’
Scruton’s view of prayer is interesting as well; he speaks of ‘intransitive prayer’ which sees prayer as a kind of thankfulness, and a posture, rather than directed at an object a or - perhaps rather - a Subject.
He also had a high regard for Scripture, saying it stems from a process of natural selection, ensuring all the ‘crap’ was jettisoned or written over with something better. It shows us ‘what human life is like when the full light of the Lord is shining upon it.’
One further interesting question, the foundations of which I have discussed with some others here on Twitter, is to what extent there is a shift in Scruton’s religious thought? I.e. not personally, but in his professional work.
One mustn’t assume a perfect coherence (Skinner’s ‘mythology of coherence’) over his entire lifetime - it is plausible that he changed his mind. He once said ‘I have never changed my mind’ but also said ‘changing your mind is the best proof you’ve got one.’
Scruton claimed not to believe in transcendentals. However, in this talk he suggests he has some conception of the three traditional transcendentals, although he does not refer to them in that way. https://wheatley.byu.edu/the-true-the-good-and-the-beautiful/
If we think with RS for a moment, we might ask; if evil is merely the privation of some Good, mustn’t the same be true of all transcendentals? I.e. ugliness is a privation of Beauty, falsehood a privation of Truth?
But ugly things seems to be replete with being; yet as a transcendental must it not have some level of Beauty? For all things that exist are in some way True, Good, Beautiful is they are transcendentals (predicable universally).
The same would go for falsehood; is some Daemon who constantly lies merely lacking in Truth? Or are his lies ‘real’ in some sense? What if he is trapped in the liars paradox - is his lie real, ie not just lack of Truth?
And finally, Good means everything that exists is Good and it is better to exist than not to exist. But how could we know this outside of ourselves? If we didn’t exist, we would never have known, and had we not had existed nobody who knows us would have known us.
For those interested in pursuing the question of RS’ religious philosophy, there are plenty of videos on YouTube of him discussing: Can we talk about God? Can we apprehend the transcendent? Is Art a substitute for Religion? Book of Common Prayer, religion as aspect of human life.
Books of interest would be: Face of God, Soul of the World, his Wagner trilogy, The Religious Philosophy of RS, Gentle Regrets, I Drink, Therefore I Am, and perhaps also look at some of his novels, like Notes from the Underground.
I’ll end (or pause) this section with Scruton’s poem ‘Kant’s Prayer’:
God to whom my life is owed,
Not life I thank you for, nor love,
But two great gifts that you bestowed:
The law within, the stars above.
God to whom my life is owed,
Not life I thank you for, nor love,
But two great gifts that you bestowed:
The law within, the stars above.
What would a Catholic reading of Scruton entail? A first step might be to read Kant generously (perhaps more adequately than hitherto), then see how Scruton fits this, and what place he allows faith. Reader of Scruton is faced with an enchanted world, encapsulated in Catholicism.
That RS wasn’t himself a Catholic is inconsequential, after all neither were Aristotle, Maimonides, Avicenna/Averroes, and - more radically - perhaps not Thomas in the *same* way as we recognise today.
One aspect that isn’t mentioned often is Scruton’s humour. Here is a clip from his documentary on Beauty, discussing contemporary art with an artist:
Another example, discussing selfies: ‘nothing really matters, except this idiot smiling face in front of it.’
Here he discusses @ladygaga’s lack of melody in ‘Poker Face’ in a way that brings about some laughs:
In his writing we also find jokes and humorous remarks; here is one: ‘I could be wrong in thinking that this I is Roger Scruton: I might in fact be Gordon Brown suffering from delusions of grandeur.’ (Face of God)
A personal example is when I told him it is his fault I became a Catholic and a cleric, and he replied with a smile, ‘I’m sorry.’ Can you think of examples of his humour?
One sometimes hears a criticism to the effect that Scruton’s philosophy lacks (presumably metaphysical) depth. The problem with the deep, of course, is that you run the risk of drowning.
In a way, he addressed this in an interview stating; ‘there are a lot of things that are more challenging than my worldview, but it doesn’t follow that they are for that reason more true.’
As some people have remarked earlier today, RS could often be shy and was very humble, but could deliver biting replies. Here (very end) he is accused of not listening to hip-hop and says ‘that’s what you’ve been taught to say, but it’s a total cliché.’
In Scruton’s philosophy of sexual desire, the main opponent identified is Plato, for he distinguished animal lust and reason of the soul - but for RS it is us as being in our incarnation who are loved; we are both animal and human. I would challenge his reading of Plato.
It seems clear that Plato did value the body (given a careful reading of him), see Zoller’s book on this. He clearly saw our bodily existence as a means to philosophy, and indeed Eros (and ‘the things of Aphrodite’) as a part of this.
That difference in interpretation of Plato aside, RS insights in Sexual Desire and Death-Devoted Heart are - I believe - crucial for our own time. It clarifies what it means to desire another person in their freedom, as subjects whom we encounter ‘I to I.’
The philosophy of desire is relatively neglected by philosophers, with the exception of Plato, Schopenhauer, Sartre, J-L Marion - making Scruton’s contribution all the more relevant.
For RS, sexual desire is intimately related to the sacred (as for Plato, arguably). Dooley describes it thus: “In the moment of desire, I confront a subject incarnate within the object, or a free self situated in a body which ‘is not you but yours.’” This is also rather Platonic.
It would be interesting to compare RS philosophy with Scripture, where touch is presented as a form of knowledge, and indeed relations are referred to as (to paraphrase) ‘knowing one another.’ Also compare to ‘theology of flesh’ (Griffiths, Falque etc).
As RS makes clear, pornography is the antithesis of true desire; we no longer look at each other as free beings to be loved, but as objects to be enjoyed. The human face is desecrated, and the body objectified.
For those who wish to pursue this subject and Scruton’s thoughts on it, a first instance could be the following article from @firstthingsmag. https://www.firstthings.com/article/2014/12/is-sex-necessary
To understand Scruton’s philosophy of music, it is important to understand his distinction between the Lebenswelt and scientific worldview (cognitive-dualism). We can see it as waves in the air (science), or as a melody etc, as a unified whole inviting us to comment and enjoy.
Another important distinction is that we don’t hear music, but listen to it. Today, with background music surrounding us, this distinction is blurred.
For Scruton, music is also related to the transcendent. When encountering music, we hear a voice speaking to us from another place and whose order is only dimly reflected’ in our empirical world.
Scruton has also produced his own music; two operas, Violet (2005) and The Minister(1998), and shortly before passing An Angel Passes. He has also set some of the Spanish poet Lorcas’s poems to music.
It would be interesting to hear some thoughts on Scruton’s philosophy of music by some musical experts; @SileFragor @schola_cantorum @benjybloor @FutureSymphony
A further distinction is between merely hearing music and hearing with understanding, for which Scruton draws on insights of Wittgenstein (who was musical himself). See ‘Understanding Music’ by RS for more on this. Consequently, one can grow in understanding and appreciation.
Scruton’s musical philosophy is also carried over into his treatment of Wagner, whom he also treats as a philosopher in his own right (quite rightly too, as did Magee).
He wrote three books (trilogy? Triptych?); Death-Devoted Heart (Tristan und Isolde), The Ring of Truth and Parsifal, all examining the music, storyline and philosophical themes.
In the first, he meditates on the significance of death to love. Could we be loving beings without mortality? Our love is conditioned by the knowledge that it could one day come to an end - ‘till death do us part.’
It would have been interesting to get RS views of Der fliegende Holländer; the Dutchman is condemned to sail until he finds true love, and only when Daland’s daughter throws herself into the sea can they both be liberated and assumed by love.
The Ring of Truth is a meditation on the truth of the human condition as articulated by Wagner; that sacrifice is an inextricable part of life. It begins with a good summary of German Idealism as well. For more on this subject, @Scruton_Legacy are hosting a book club.
Parsifal is Scruton’s last book, published posthumously. It reflects on religion, love, the sacred and ultimately redemption. For on Scruton and Wagner, this interview is a good introduction. https://m.youtube.com/watch?index=9&list=RDTRyAcbkHNRY&v=vj4wKO_a56g
Scruton spoke just a few months before his death about Western Civilisation for @ISI.
Wagner spoke of death as a necessary condition for human love, which Scruton often remarked upon (see the link on the Ontology of Love). Love is a relation between dying things, and so the relation Love-Death is non accidental.
The relation of Love-Death is interesting, and also rather Platonic. What might Scruton have thought of Plato’s idea of Philosophy (as love of wisdom) as a preparation for death? Where do mortality-eternity meet, and are they held together/overcome/linked by Love?
