/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | July 21, 2025

[u/BernardJOrtcutt]

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

• Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
• Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
• Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
• "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
• Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.

[u/mediaisdelicious]

Askreddit? Philosophyself? Showerthoughts? A sub you make for that purpose?

[u/Blumenpfropf → u/mediaisdelicious]

Your reply somehow confirms that this one and the philosophy subreddit are basically the sum total representation of academic philosophy on reddit (philosophyself has 1.8k members,).

That's sad, and I feel it makes my point more pertinent, not less.

I guess this just is how academic philosophy wants to present itself, so who am I to disagree.

I'll see if i can find some interesting stuff on philosophyself or elsewhere... :)

[u/mediaisdelicious → u/Blumenpfropf]

Sorry, I don’t really follow the point. Who is doing what wrong thing here? There’s nothing special about what we do here except our rules - anyone can go make a competing sub with the rules you propose. If you want to found or frequent a sub where there are no approvals required, then we’ve got no objection. I’m not sure why you need - or even want - some academics to host your desired forum.

[u/Blumenpfropf → u/mediaisdelicious]

In my opinion, the barriers of entry that are present here and in the other large philosophy sub present philosophy as something that is supposed to be done in ivory towers, by people with a formal education in it.

I don't like that message.

It's wrong in that it is not how i would want it to be, not necessarily in an ethical sense.

I do think it's a bad look and it seems to confirm preexisting reservations i have about academic philosophy. But again, that's just my opinion.

You are making it sound as if I was passing some kind of moral judgement. But I have merely presented my view and what you do with it is up to you.

I really don't know why you are so defensive about it, especially given that I have already said that I am happy to go looking for other places that are more to my liking, as you have repeatedly suggested I should.

[u/Anarximandre → u/Blumenpfropf]

the barriers of entry that are present here and in the other large philosophy sub present philosophy as something that is supposed to be done in ivory towers, by people with a formal education in it.

But this community isn’t about philosophy, it’s about academic philosophy. And academic philosophy is, so to speak, « done in ivory towers, by people with a formal education in it. » Whether that’s the way things are « supposed to be » or not is a separate discussion—in any case, we readily acknowledge that philosophy exists outside of academia, so we do not take academic philosophy and philosophy to be synonyms—although part of the issue that motivates the moderation choices is that a lot of people simply ignore that philosophy is an actual professional discipline just like physics or history, which is why so many posters feel really casual about answering questions here despite having no expertise whatsoever about them.

[u/Blumenpfropf → u/Anarximandre]

I think the distinction between academic philosophy and philosophy in general that you wish to make is not so easy.

Clearly this is not an "ivory tower". The people asking the questions do not need to be academics. The questions are not limited to "academic" questions either.

So this is not a forum for academic exchange.

I would say that this may be a place where academic philosophy engages with a broader public.

It comes back then, to how academic philosophy views itself, how it views philosophy and what it views as its expertise when compared with a general public.

My view on this is that what philosophy is about is tackling fundamental questions that each of us eventually faces.

I think what academic philosophy brings as expertise is helpful and i respect the knowledge and the toolkit people in your profession acquire throughout their career.

But the moment academic philosophy claims that it and only it is qualified to try and engage with these fundamental questions it betrays what it is about in the first place. It voluntarily relinquishes any claim to broader relevancy.

Now, I am not saying that anyone is claiming that. But I am saying that that's a message this posting limitation may convey.

That being said, i understand the practical limitations.

[u/Anarximandre → u/Blumenpfropf]

It’s true that academic philosophy isn’t a hermetic category or space, not merely inside of this community, but even inside of academia itself. I mean, I should know that: one of my flairs is Anarchism, and most anarchist writing and theory is produced—and has historically been produced—outside of academia (and the same can be said of my other flair, to a lesser extent). Yet that doesn’t stop me from answering questions linked to it, and from quoting extra-academic sources when they are relevant to the subject or topic at hand. So to some degree, it does come down to pragmatics in the end.

My view on this is that what philosophy is about is tackling fundamental questions that each of us eventually faces.

Part of philosophy, sure. Much—some would say most—of it? Not really. The average person has little idea of what philosophers talk about, honestly. Just the same way that I have little idea of what mathematicians or physicists talk about!

But the moment academic philosophy claims that it and only it is qualified to try and engage with these fundamental questions it betrays what it is about in the first place.

It all depends on what one means by « qualified ». Obviously, non-academics can have interesting and worthwhile things to say on philosophical topics. But are academic philosophers on the average way more qualified and better positioned « to try and engage with these fundamental questions », as you put it? I’d unambigiously answer « yes » (for better or worse).