Yet more on the nature of "philosophy"... It seems to me that a complete idiot who has an idiotic original thought is more a philosopher than an educated person who merely parrots the words of their intellectual superiors. What am I talking about? Occasionally on message boards, or in actual discussions, I come across people who are very proficient at tossing out quotes from people like Socrates, Sartre, or any of a hundred other dead folk. Yet press them for an original reply, and they are lost. Silly me, I once attended a meeting of the Melbourne Existentialists Society, and found this very problem. A bunch of morons parroting the words of their intellectual superiors. This is not philosophy. This is sycophancy. I would much prefer a conversation with a brain-damaged guy I know who hasn't read any alleged books about philosophy, than converse with an idiot who throws out the words of others constantly. Just something to consider when trying to determine what does, or does not, constitute "philosophy".