That article is clearly not saying that you shouldn't read philosophy at all. It's arguing that there is a lot of crap philosophy, but there's plenty of articl

That article is clearly not saying that you shouldn't read philosophy at all. It's arguing that there is a lot of crap philosophy, but there's plenty of articles arguing there's a lot of crap physics, psychology, and economics. That doesn't mean we should do that research. Edit: Actually, rereading this article, the author is clearly saying basically the opposite. The author is saying philosophy is useful if it is critical. """Unfortunately, many important problems are fundamentally philosophical problems. Philosophy itself is unavoidable. How can we proceed?""" How can you point to this article as proof that we shouldn't be studying philosophy when the article says it is unaviodable?