> it seems to me that clarity of thought is not a mere academic nicety, but is an essential component of informed public debate; if academic philosophy can help

> it seems to me that clarity of thought is not a mere academic nicety, but is an essential component of informed public debate; if academic philosophy can help to provide or enhance such clarity, that constitutes a significant contribution to society. I really appreciate this statement. Yes, clarity of thought is central to good thinking, good thinking is indispensable when judging the difference between true and false (or good and evil), and correct judgments are necessary to functioning as a beneficial member of society. That's not to say diversity of opinion is a bad thing. On the contrary, divergent opinions expressed publicly with clarity help us all think better.