FWIW, my take on Scruton's conservatism: 1. Yeah, Edmund Burke is pretty much right about the dangers of top down change motivated by a political philosophy derived from first principles. (I've thought that for years.)
Show this thread
-
Does Roger Scruton support slavery, religious intolerance, or racism?
No. But he absolutely explicitly defends prejudice... (But the more interesting question is whether conservatism provides the tools with which to criticize these things; and if so, whether it can coherently do so).
-
-
as for prejudice, it is perhaps just a Hume-an preference for custom, practice, sentiment, and what has worked so far. Pragmatism by another name, against the utopian rationalism and the consequences of that we have witnessed.
-
But that's not a defense of prejudice as prejudice. That's basically a consequentialist defence. Scruton wants to secure prejudice against rationally constructed arguments even if they're consequentialist in nature.
-
Where does Scruton defend prejudice regardless of consequences?
-
Sorry, we're at cross purposes. Scruton's point is that prejudice as prejudice isn't rational - it's not the outcome of a rational argument (consequentialist or otherwise). You've got to step outside of it, & look at it from a third-person perspective, as an anthropologist might.
-
Prejudice is not the outcome of rational argument, yes. It may be the result of history, custom and practice - tried & tested through time. Has benefits though not obvious, which one should not throw away lightly, just because one cannot provide a rational justification for it.
-
Right, but Scruton's point is prejudice isn't motivated by the fact it's the result of history, custom and practice. We're not making consequentialist calculations: don't shag around because it'll destabilize society. But nevertheless if we look at it from the outside, then...
-
I don’t recognise what you are attributing to Scruton, and what he actually says about prejudice (tradition). Here are his words on it. ‘Conservatism’ p 42-43pic.twitter.com/kmUg3xzZYL
-
Hmmm. See what he says here (about 2/3s the way down): https://www.scribd.com/document/217031799/Why-I-Became-a-Conservative-R-Scruton …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
for Scruton conservatism involves supporting reform too, in order to preserve what is good. It is not a blind supporting of reactionaryism.
-
Sure, but there's also the idea that individuals combining together in free association under the rule of law tends to mitigate against large scale injustice. Slavery doesn't sit well with that idea. And it's not merely a matter of things not being perfect. Slavery was barbaric.
-
Yes, but where does Scruton argue against it? He is qualified as a barrister, and many of his conservative arguments are for the superiority of English common law over other systems of law.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.