We’re talking here specifically about the amateur philosophy, presented with neologisms as if it’s original thought, when it simply isn’t. You seem to be saying that it’s valuable if EY writes about it but not if professional philosophers do—surely that’s not what you mean?
We’re talking here specifically about the amateur philosophy, presented with neologisms as if it’s original thought, when it simply isn’t. You seem to be saying that it’s valuable if EY writes about it but not if professional philosophers do—surely that’s not what you mean?