I agree. It's quite obvious the witty and ironical dr S intended that his audience should register the bad pun, perhaps as a wry criticism of the stupid, mechanistic, alienated and hyper-masculine and essentially patriarchal-instrumental and lifeless nature of those ideas. Behold the inevitably degenerate pseudo philosophy of the erotic suited to the insanity of total commodification under patriarchal-capitalist disposable consumerism and possessive individualism. Love andrea
This was a really enlightnening video. I've been thinking for a while now how are or why are people so self-centered hedonists circulating only around their own needs and desires. Furthermore seeing them being unhappy although they have anyone to f with and anyone to use for their own desires. I've made the assumption that the more variety with sex people have, the more miserable people become. Maybe it does have something to do with the fact that loyalty and trust are the main compartments of responsibility and shame is something that tries to warn us about doing morally wrong and selfishly (like Scruton said). The more variety one has with sex, the more one really does compare the encounters between eachother. No matter how one would want it to be. Then it becomes not unique as such where you automatically pick up differences between individuals but don't really bond with anyone since your brain has rotted with these different experiences which have worn off the desire and its meaning in on itself. Many people are never going to be able to feel such connection that is so deep and tight that only a lifelong dedicatement to one another could achieve, where both are learning everything from experimenting things together.
I am curious, can you tell what ideas from the speech were enlightening for you? I did not personally find the speech very inspiring, so maybe I missed something.
If there is no “I” apart from the body then your response is simply the result of chemical reactions in your brain. There must be a person (something metaphysical) apart from the body. This is the point he is making and we all know it is true. Otherwise, these comments are simply the interaction of complex chemical systems… but we get angry when people disagree with us. We believe we are right and they are wrong (or at least we’re good and what you’re advocating is evil). This is one of the main points of the video… if we are nothing more than our bodies then why should we restrain our body’s urges? But we are more than a body and there are issue of guilt, shame, and moral restraint in sex.
@@prayingpilot But sir, we don’t believe our souls are a “ghost in the machine”. We believe the soul is the form of the body. Best wishes to you and yours.
@WuzzupWhitey that's unfortunate for your partners. Sex can be an exceptionally powerful bonding experience, nourishing the deepest of affections between people.
@@DisenchantedWithSociety Sex is not the expression of love either. Sex is a physiological mechanism to couple husband and wife together in order to have children and a happy family.
Unfortunately, sacred sexuality has lost its role in the western minds yet its replete within all the traditions that have preserve the tantric teachings. The last vestige of that being the Gnostics of which has its renewed reverberation by that authentic master and Christ of Samael Aun Weor. Whomever, seeking to know of the sublime nature of this sort of lovemaking should study the depths of it which has been the profound meaning behind the mark of genius.
It's fun how often the deep thinkers put forth by the Know Nothing side of the spectrum tend to head toward the Straw Man first, almost inevitably. "Sir" Roger starts this talk there, and goes nowhere after.
@robforrester3727 I agree with you, I see Scruton's speech as a combination of Straw Men (such that the liberal or "plain-sex" view on sexual desire removes the other person from the encounter) , claims which could be true but are empirically false (such as that therapists today encounter more people unable to enter relationships due to porn), and just empty repetition, where he does not present any arguments, just repeats traditional sexual moral statements.
Desiring someone as a person and not an object. That might be the best definition of love I ever heard.
Roger Scruton was probably the only person who could talk about sex without either laughing nervously himself or anyone in the audience doing so.
Thank you. RIP Sir Roger Scruton.
What a true masterclass.... I m speechless.
Just the first 3 minutes of this speech are brilliant. So insightful and succinct.
'Penetrated the culture'....
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The best pun ever...
That got under the American humor RADAR...
If you're twelve, I guess...
I agree.
It's quite obvious the witty and ironical dr S intended that his audience should register the bad pun, perhaps as a wry criticism of the stupid, mechanistic, alienated and hyper-masculine and essentially patriarchal-instrumental and lifeless nature of those ideas.
Behold the inevitably degenerate pseudo philosophy of the erotic suited to the insanity of total commodification under patriarchal-capitalist disposable consumerism and possessive individualism.
Love andrea
@@andreapandypetrapan You might be interested to know that Scruton would have considered your sexuality to be perverted.
This was a really enlightnening video. I've been thinking for a while now how are or why are people so self-centered hedonists circulating only around their own needs and desires. Furthermore seeing them being unhappy although they have anyone to f with and anyone to use for their own desires. I've made the assumption that the more variety with sex people have, the more miserable people become. Maybe it does have something to do with the fact that loyalty and trust are the main compartments of responsibility and shame is something that tries to warn us about doing morally wrong and selfishly (like Scruton said). The more variety one has with sex, the more one really does compare the encounters between eachother. No matter how one would want it to be. Then it becomes not unique as such where you automatically pick up differences between individuals but don't really bond with anyone since your brain has rotted with these different experiences which have worn off the desire and its meaning in on itself. Many people are never going to be able to feel such connection that is so deep and tight that only a lifelong dedicatement to one another could achieve, where both are learning everything from experimenting things together.
I am curious, can you tell what ideas from the speech were enlightening for you? I did not personally find the speech very inspiring, so maybe I missed something.
Food for thought
Valentine's day 2020. Nice ;-)
A shame the Institute didn’t open the lecture to questions and comments.
🙏
There is an “I” apart from the body? I love Sir Roger, but, sorry.
Maybe, maybe not. None of us can say for sure either way.
The highest peaks of Hindu Philosophy agree with Sir Roger.
If there is no “I” apart from the body then your response is simply the result of chemical reactions in your brain. There must be a person (something metaphysical) apart from the body. This is the point he is making and we all know it is true. Otherwise, these comments are simply the interaction of complex chemical systems… but we get angry when people disagree with us. We believe we are right and they are wrong (or at least we’re good and what you’re advocating is evil). This is one of the main points of the video… if we are nothing more than our bodies then why should we restrain our body’s urges? But we are more than a body and there are issue of guilt, shame, and moral restraint in sex.
@@prayingpilot But sir, we don’t believe our souls are a “ghost in the machine”. We believe the soul is the form of the body.
Best wishes to you and yours.
One point worth mentioning: *SEX IS NOT LOVE* in any shape or form.
What about lovemaking?
@@Thomas...191 No such thing
@WuzzupWhitey that's unfortunate for your partners. Sex can be an exceptionally powerful bonding experience, nourishing the deepest of affections between people.
@@DisenchantedWithSociety Sex is not the expression of love either. Sex is a physiological mechanism to couple husband and wife together in order to have children and a happy family.
Unfortunately, sacred sexuality has lost its role in the western minds yet its replete within all the traditions that have preserve the tantric teachings. The last vestige of that being the Gnostics of which has its renewed reverberation by that authentic master and Christ of Samael Aun Weor. Whomever, seeking to know of the sublime nature of this sort of lovemaking should study the depths of it which has been the profound meaning behind the mark of genius.
It's fun how often the deep thinkers put forth by the Know Nothing side of the spectrum tend to head toward the Straw Man first, almost inevitably. "Sir" Roger starts this talk there, and goes nowhere after.
Are you a p✡rn-watcher?
Leftists don't exist? Oh what wonderful news.
@robforrester3727 I agree with you, I see Scruton's speech as a combination of Straw Men (such that the liberal or "plain-sex" view on sexual desire removes the other person from the encounter) , claims which could be true but are empirically false (such as that therapists today encounter more people unable to enter relationships due to porn), and just empty repetition, where he does not present any arguments, just repeats traditional sexual moral statements.
@@jakubdomes4954 Did you listen to the talk?