Why wouldn't we, though? Think about it for a second. It's an intellectually stimulating pursuit, that just so happens to benefit everybody else in the long run. What downside is there to making sure some people take the bait?
The bolded part is tangential. If philosophy is concerned with truth for truth's sake, then whether or not the truth benefits society is a separate issue. For the record, I happen to agree with you about philosophy's social value (although my stance is more nuanced; not everyone can or should "handle" philosophy).
ViviffTheMobile posted...
Oh and I minored in philosophy, and I'll tell you that having professors that know philosophy is WAY better than learning it on your own or through some secondary subject. It's really easy to "philosophy wrong" and professors are great at being able to steer you in the right direction, and even help you skip over common mistakes that most people including themselves made. I mean 10 weeks from a philosophy doctor in a the subject of your choice, or trying to do it on your own? I don't understand why philosophy is suddenly different than any other subject when it comes to how to learn it. No one studies Sociology on their own and claims to be an expert. Philosophy PhDs basically have no choice but to go into academics, so why not get lessons from the best there are out there?
You put it about a hundred times better than I could! I feel that philosophy suffers the same fate as subjects like English and politics: unlike, say, physics, which has clear intellectual barriers to entry, philosophy is one of those things people believe they have a "right" to do well without any formal training. It's the same reason every other Joe Schmo feels the need to talk politics with the pretensions of an expert.
--
Fire Emblem: Awakening has the best music ever. Listen to it \/
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL68CA009923BACBEE&feature=plcp