Is it true that the professional academic philosopher is a relatively new phenomenon? If so, what have been the benefits and shortcomings of professionalising philosophy? I ask this because someone told me recently that the most significant contributions to philosophy have been made by people who never considered themselves to be philosophers as such, but who got philosophical about their primary area of interest - mathematics, science, politics or whatever.

Hi. As an undergrad I became deeply interested in philosophy two years ago, and am currently on track to graduate next semester. I've enjoyed relative academic success in my studies but am usually unable to translate this into any sort of "philosophical" confidence. My question I suppose is this, did any of you experience extreme dread before considering grad school and lack of confidence as well? I feel that in ways philosophy has opened up so much for me, and that I can either continue to pursue it academically or live out a "philosophical" existence of experience. This is all very vague but I'm looking forward to hearing advice from a diversity of people in the field. Thank you for your time...Jake Claro

Why did you take philosophy? Was it a long standing goal in life or did you just wake up one morning and decide to be the next Plato or Socrates?

I am a student interested in philosophy as a major. Are there any careers realistic for a philosophy major outside of teaching?

The rapid growth of scientific research has resulted in, and is probably also the result of, the impressive solution of successive scientific problems. Do the panelists think that the rapid growth of philosophical research in Universities can be explained correspondingly in terms of impressive solution of philosophical problems? If not, then by what?

This is kind of a counterfactual question. If the atmosphere in the past had been made more inviting to women would we presently have knowledge that we do not have at present? We all know I think that sensitivities enter and often create philosophy along with poetry. Some sensitivities have been left on the sidelines, just how heavy a price have we paid for this? Is it presently even productive to ask such a question? James Ont, Canada

Seeing as you are Philosophers I thought you would be the ones to ask this question. Is there, or has there ever been, any truth to the existence of the Philosopher's Stone?

I've been away from academia since I dropped out of philosophy grad school in 1997, so I'm out of touch with recent developments in philosophy. What are the most significant philosophical books or papers of the past eight or so years? (My main areas of interest in grad school were metaphysics and philosophy of language, but I'd be interested in your answer whatever your specialty.)

It seems ever since Wittgenstein there has not been much of a stir in the philosophical world (not to undermine the work of any contemporary philosophers). Some say that his work marked the "end of philosophy." In what sense did he put an end to the discourse? Do you expect there to be a future philosopher who will have an impact quite like that of Wittgenstein, or say, Nietzsche, Kant, or even Aristotle? Moreover, are there any contemporary philosophers who are on this path? In which field(s) do you think a paradigm shift of this sort will occur?

Is it that philosophy is competitive or is it just the way in which we (as humans) have come to be in general that is competitive? I'll try and spell out the distinction. My professor seems to vie for his idea. Descartes defends his position. Hobbes attacks Descartes' idea. Spinoza attacks both. There are dissertational "defenses". These are just a few examples of competitiveness in philosophy. Are humans just competitive? But if we are trying to get at truth, how does competition help? I can't understand why I feel the need to be the smartest person in my class. If I am not, I feel anguish and despair. Is it that anguish and despair come from losing and philosophy for me is just a competition and for other people it is not that way at all? But that is not true. Does philosophy harbor competition, and if it does, is it intrinsically flawed? Would art be a better way to get at truth? But art is competitive too! Is existence, then, a Schopenhauerian nightmare--endless striving to overcome, when...