A Philosophical Dialogue Around Confession, Forgiveness and Justicialism – Eva Casini, Klaus-Michael Kodalle: Verzeihung denken – Die verkannte Grundlage humaner Verhältnisse, Nix für Deutsche: Phänomen Gruppenvergewaltigungen - Allianz für Gelsenkirchen, Grünen Göring Eckardt: „Unser Land wird sich ändern, und zwar drastisch. flag. We all screw up periodically in our lives; public figures have the misfortune of often doing so in public -- it is one of the prices of fame that can't really be avoided! You on the other hand, if the article on Roger Scruton is anything to go by, persistently and systematically misrepresent the authors you dislike. To her credit she has (unlike some of the more lazy 1984 brigade) gone back to a couple of the actual texts. I am very uncomfortable with that attitude, and would like others to comment on whether it is appropriate. "So mußt du sein, dir kannst du nicht entfliehen" indeed! Indeed truth is their enemy not their friend. I am not aware that anybody has disputed it. This Roger Scruton article is the Wikipedia page from which I have been blocked. This was explained to her i.e. The Scruton tapes: an anatomy of a modern hit job . Only last year for example he discussed them at length in his book Beauty and also broadcast a BBC documentary where he discussed sexual feelings and their connection to Platonic ideas. Whatever discussion can be had as to editing (and isn't this always the case), at this point I can't see a need for a tag here. I would improve the text but I am banned from contributing to the article. All that happened was that you moved inappropriate material (his views on fox hunting and battery farms) to a new "controversies" section, whose only content which was indeed controversial was the problematic Guardian ref, which was again referred to in detail and at length. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 18:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC). He was also co-founder and trustee of the Jagiellonian Trust, working in Poland and Hungary from 1982 until the return of democracy in 1989, and founder and trustee of the Anglo-Lebanese Cultural Association, working for reconciliation between the Lebanese sects from 1987 until it was disbanded in 1995, after the occupation of Lebanon by Syria. As I say, every word you type reveals what a deeply poisonous individual you are, and yes, I do think you are unfit to be a Wikipedia editor. I am no doubt too blunt in my responses, but I cannot stand bullying, especially the sort of bullying that pretends to be "just following the rules", and I detest even more people using Wikipedia as a vehicle for their own partisan (often political) hatreds. Archiv; Hilfe; Anmelden. [3], Scruton told the BMJ that he wrote the pamphlet because of his long-standing concerns about legislative powers being transferred to transnational institutions, not with the aim of exonerating tobacco; he acknowledged that, with hindsight, he should have declared an interest. Originating from architecture schools of the Ivy League universities in America, the euphemism is often used in critique sessions of design studios. I am pleased to see that the matter has -- reportedly -- been referred to Wikipedia editors. And the tobacco thing relates to his business interests really, not his Views. But the criticisms remain. I would also like to draw to editors' attention the following: "Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject", also from here. It's pertinent information, why not? Meanwhile, the Roger Scruton article continues to flounder in mediocrity. As the Americans like to say: Period. Auch kleine Beiträge sind herzlich willkommen. However, while Scruton appears to … This is sheer vanity. Whether or not you yourself prove to be bigoted and ignorant I judge entirely on your behaviour here. Perhaps the comments about Scruton from Martha Nussbaum are meant to serve as a substitute, but they don't at all convey the same information (plus it also looks as though they're sourced to a blog - http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/ - it quotes Nussbaum in the New Republic, but we should be using the original TNR article, not the quote from the blog). Die Bedrohung der Natur ist ihr zufolge dem internationalen Kapitalismus, dem Konsumverhalten und der unbegrenzten Ausbeutung…, Jeder weiß, "gut Ding will Weile haben", aber die Zeit mag sich keiner nehmen. I wonder why? Graphic Violence ; Graphic Sexual Content ; texts. His views on homosexuality are little more than a footnote. UserVOBO (talk) 08:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC). SlimVirgin talk|contribs 14:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC), From 1979, Scruton was an active supporter of dissidents in Czechoslovakia when the country was under the rule of the Communist Party. Yes this is Stalinist (not to say petty and vindictive) and even if I am permitted to improve the article the chances are very high that SlimVirgin will be every bit as proprietorial in the future as she has been in the past. I guess its because flesh and blood people carry more about sex then that brainy-type things (/failed-humor-attempt). Judged against this background, it seems to me that the current article makes a reasonable stab at balance on the more controversial questions. UserVOBO (talk) 01:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC), Since there seems to be an ongoing dispute here over how to present Scruton's views on homosexuality, I have made another report at the Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard. The paragraph is far, far too conflated as it is. His edits at Philip Rieff here in November copied word for word several paragraphs from a 2005 article by David Glenn in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Ein konservativer Denkansatz. This has got nothing to do with Right or Left, but the question of how you are resorting to shoddy standards of Wikipedia editing when better and more honourable alternatives are open to you. The first part however seems helpful and informative, and I can't think of a valid reason for removing it. in particular should be accompanied by a reading of Allan Bloom's "Nietzscheanization of the Left, or Vice Versa" from the Closing of the American Mind. The editing here wasn't so bad because he did provide citations, which is why I fixed it up rather than removing it. I have none of his books on aesthetics, nor his book on Spinoza, or his Short History of Modern Philosophy. PLEASE, add the pronunciation of 'Scruton' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.21.194.58 (talk) 16:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC), whilst i understand that this man spent some time reading philosophy books at an elitist university when he was younger, can he really be considered a 'philosopher' ? I am simply reporting what seems to be news to you, that he is generally regarded by experts in the field as one of the leading living theorists of aesthetics, regardless of their opinion about the truth or otherwise of his claims. I have restored that material, since it is properly sourced. Roger Scruton, 1944 geboren, lehrt Philosophie in Oxford und am American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.. Der Umweltschutz liegt herkömmlich im Hoheitsgebiet der politischen Linken. Goodness me, I disagree with this set of arguments! Talk:Roger Scruton/Archive 1. The ongoing disputes at the article make it essential that more editors take an interest in it. What did happen is that a party broke into his computer and took the item without his permission, i.e., stole it, or in this context, "hacked". No_Favorite. I maintain that as Wikipedia editors we should be concentrating on how to include more salient, relevant and less contentious material—again, this link is an excellent example. The report was based on a hacked email. Unterstützen Sie das Tabula Rasa Magazin. [From there, indeed, applying mere logic (and we are dealing, after all, with a professional philosopher, who is very versed in logic -- it is part of what they study and teach), if one no longer stands by the view that there is a social justification for aversion to homosexuality, then it is fair to expect that he would also change his view on the possible justification for restrictions on homosexuality. The editor SlimVirgin has again removed the POV, this time with the slightly garbled comment: (rmvd tag (you're the only person who wants it, and it can't stay forever), and some tidying (you can't add praise to the lead, while removing criticism -- we need all or none)), I would have thought that being awarded the highest honour possible for a civilian by a foreign government is not "praise" but simply an important fact that is significant enough to merit a mention in the lead. So, if there are sources for this specific explanation, let's see them. His writings on politics are controversial, and because they are on the political Right, are not widely studied in universities. Jprw (talk) 10:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC), Well from the Guardian article it is clear that he was dismayed that an item from his personal correspondence was stolen and made public. You notice that I only described your actions as "not interested in the content of his writings, but...focused (for reasons best known to themselves - although I can guess) in engaging in a rather pathetic and spiteful campaign of reversions and deletions" after you had me banned from making changes to the Roger Scruton article.