So it's an adversarial division of epistemic labor, that's what I think the Socratic method is.
If the only way to understand anything, would be to understand everything, then we could understand nothing.
What do philosophy and statistics have in common?
People like them the least.
There was a study done in 2019 in the United States of how people feel about humanities and arts. There's us! Philosophy! Statistics! People like us the least. Science, history, even math got in there higher than us. What is going on? I'll tell you what's going on: People aren't reading. When people, general public, are out there engaging with humanities and arts, they're not reading. They're watching videos. They're doing online searches. Sometimes they pick up a book, but that's classified as engaging with literature, and it doesn't happen nearly as much as you think. Usually it's shows with historical content or researching something online. People like documentaries. So "writing stuff" is not public philosophy. That's just writing stuff - you're like every other blogger out there.
“What is a number, Mr. Waterhouse?” Daniel groaned. “How can you ask such questions?” “How can you not ask them, sir? You are a philosopher, are you not?”
Neal Stephenson: Quicksilver