Regarding whether philosophy is for everyone: it could be in a better world. It used to be that only a few people learned math, but now in USA we try to teach arithmetic to everyone in elementary school. We’re not very good at teaching it, but a lot of people become competent at it. Not many people become specialist mathematicians who learn really advanced math. Philosophy could be the same way: ~everyone learns the basics, but only a few people become experts on more advanced parts of the field. Like we’re trying to make ~everyone literate but only a few people write books, are grammar experts, or are great at analyzing and understanding text (which gets into philosophy skill too).
I didnt think before that we would be stuck in discussions or debates like this for centuries. I thought we could settle stuff ok like we do in science
Idk if you address this later in the article (I skimmed through it and doesn’t seem like you did) but I know Miss Rand had a sentiment that everyone should learn philosophy. Especially today. Is this commenting suggesting something against that? Against everyone learning philosophy? Or am I overthinking it?
Whether there’s a disagreement depends on specifically what she said and the context.
If she said “ideally” then maybe there isn’t a disagreement.
If she said it was “practical” and “realistic” for everyone to learn philosophy today, and specifically to learn good philosophy ideas that improve their lives significantly (not learn the various popular bad ideas, nor be an armchair philosopher) then there’d be a disagreement.
I’m going to double-check soon if she made any specific statement and what she said in them, but I was referring to the sentiment I got from Philosophy: Who Needs It . I think the sentiment “was who needs philosophy?” “you do.” so then i took that to mean people should try and learn philosophy today and now.