Dear Derek,

I also do not know what the solution is. It may be a bit drastic what I suggest, but isn't contemporary philosophy in a drastic state, with the budget cuts, and the fact that today, for students that come from less than rich households, it is downright economically dangerous to pursue a career in academic philosophy? 

I guess danger and poverty are things some brave people can handle, if their lives are meaningful - and philosophy at its radical best can be that way. "At its radical best" means for to me to be able to say something very important about the roots of the most pressing issues at a given time - something other people just cannot see because they haven't given it the kind of abstract, penetrative thought philosophers are capable of. Think Spinoza, Marx, Nietzsche, Camus, there are quite a few. But to take on the risks, just to enter into the "deep conservatism" you mention? Isn't this "deep conservatism" exactly what philosophy is supposed to challenge? Don't philosophers have any responsibility towards mankind - yes, mankind - as a whole, to dig out those truths from underneath our normal daily thought processes - and show the world a reflection of itself, and thus transform it? That is roughly how I see the value and purpose of philosophy. 

What is your view? 

Best,
Guy