1. There are plenty of comments in those threads that support my position, as well as the standard gatekeeping positions. 2. This subreddit isn't as representa

1. There are plenty of comments in those threads that support my position, as well as the standard gatekeeping positions. 2. This subreddit isn't as representative of professional philosophers as you think. Its demographic skews toward inexperienced grad students who (surprise) use Reddit. 3. I wrote this subreddit off 5 or 6 years ago because it was too concerned with the academic lifecycle and of existing literature of questionable quality. Appealing to authority only works if there is an authority present. 4. Again—you can't have it both ways. There are loads of philosophers who engage with the field who are deeply unserious for reasons more indictable than Harris. Edit: I should add that I don't think Harris is a particularly good philosopher, especially when it comes to his argument for moral realism. But if having bad arguments disqualifies one for being a philosopher, then we'd be committed to rejecting a huge number of contemporary academic philosophers, which doesn't strike me as your position.