Is public philosophy good? Obviously

Philosophers are a clever bunch

Image: Socrates, detail of Raphael’s The School of Athens (public domain)

Philosophers are a clever bunch. Which is a major reason I have enjoyed switching from the natural sciences (biology) to the discipline practiced by those who are said to love wisdom. But sometimes they are too clever for their own, and especially the public’s, good. Seneca warned about this:

I should deem your games of logic to be of some avail in relieving men’s burdens, if you could first show me what part of these burdens they will relieve. (Letters XLVIII.9)

I may be uncharitable here — though I’m trying not to be — but I think a recent example of the phenomenon is a column by Agnes Callard in The Point Magazine, entitled “Is public philosophy good?” Ironically, or (too) cleverly, depending on your point of view, this is the first in a new series by Callard on, wait, public philosophy!

I would have thought that the notion that public philosophy is good is obvious and requires little examination. But okay, let’s play. Callard begins by writing that “public philosophy includes, but extends beyond, the pop philosophy found in books such as Logicomix, Sophie’s World or The Matrix and Philosophy. Pop philosophy, which has parallels in pop physics, pop history and pop psychology, presents philosophical figures or concepts in an accessible way; the ‘pop’…