On the 16th of November I attended a book presentation on the most recent publication of Professor Ferenc Hörcher of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. This being: Art and Politics in Roger Scruton’s Conservative Philosophy.
I have developed a newfound respect for the tradition of intellectual conservatism, even if I disagree with the large bulk of ideas presented. I’ve always perceived the late Roger Scruton as the posterchild of contemporary conservative philosophy in the 21st century. This is why I was instantly drawn to attending this event when a friend and colleague of mine invited me.
The evening started with a short opening speech by Professor Willem Lemmens in which he introduced the audience to the two speakers of the evening: Ferenc Hörcher and Andreas Kinneging of the University of Leiden.
Afterwards, Hörcher took the stage to present his newest work mentioned above.
He first gave us a short overview of Scruton’s life and career followed by his personal relationship with the late philosopher. I was taken aback by the magnitude of Scruton’s literary contribution to his field. He has written over fifty books, which is a remarkable achievement regardless of the topic.
Hörcher analysed this large body of work through an interplay of three large subjects: art, politics, and religion. He noted that Scruton mainly wrote on political philosophy, aesthetics, and religion and that he (Hörcher) took it upon himself to emphasise the interplay between these three domains. What struck me as interesting was the fact that, despite a large contribution, Scruton does not have a Magnum Opus which presents his general philosophy. This was then also presented as a reason for Hörcher’s project.
It was said that, in Scruton’s philosophy, art, religion and politics have a triangular relationship. Religion at the top, with both art and politics at the respective bottom corners. Therefore, religion had a vertical, or rather transcendental relationship with both art and politics. This, while politics and art had a more horizontal relationship.
The explanation of this triangular model was very complex, and I would honestly have to consult Hörcher’s book to give an accurate summary.
What struck me as the most thought-provoking idea, however, was Scruton’s idea of humanity’s tendency of sacrificial scapegoating to handle conflicts, and that the ultimate sacrifice to resolve conflict was to have been Jesus Christ himself. He stated that, since Christ’s crucifixion had been the ultimate sacrifice, we as humans had to live in a state of constant gratuity towards Him.
This aspect of conscientiousness in conservative philosophy has always entertained me the most, as I feel a similar sense of duty towards my community -whatever that may be. This sense of duty does, however, have a totally different root than the crucifixion of Christ. In my own philosophy, inspired by none other than Peter Kropotkin, my sense of duty derives from the insurmountable debt that we as individuals owe to the collective whole.
“Every new invention is a synthesis, the resultant of innumerable inventions which have preceded it… By what right then can anyone ever appropriate the least morsel of this immense whole and say -This is mine, not yours?” – Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread p. 14 ([1892] 2015)
I believe that we as humans have a duty to our community, not because someone supposedly was a good guy thousands of years ago and died for it, but because we are inheritors of such wealth, both in intellectual and material terms, that the guilt of not adding to it should be simply unbearable to live with.
The Analytic Hour 
Leave a comment