I always find such discussions unsatisfying and unproductive. People take a vague and ill-defined concept that changed its meaning over time and treat it as som

I always find such discussions unsatisfying and unproductive. People take a vague and ill-defined concept that changed its meaning over time and treat it as something homogenous, bonus points if they do it twice in the same question (it talks about philosophy and art). “What if we treat philosophy as art”? Well, what if we treat it as a corpus of thoughts related only through immediate relevancy and no strict boundaries otherwise? Funny that they mention Wittgenstein but don’t bring up his idea of family resemblance ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_resemblance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_resemblance ).