The main problem with Modern-Post-Modern thinkers and wannabe philosophers, like most on this forum, is intellectual dishonesty and general cowardice. In order to engage Philosophy, and become Philosophical, or more, a Philosopher, you have to lay it all out on the line. You have to put your core-values, beliefs, and ideas to the test. That means, comparing them with others, recognizing disputes of interest, and then engaging rational dialogue and exposition with opponents. You need a level of intelligence high enough to keep track of logical contradictions. Most of humanity says one thing, thinks a second thing, and acts on a third thing. So most people don’t know themselves very well.
In reality, people act on their core-values, which are most obvious in Instinct and Reflex. Philosophers are most distant from Nature, in the sense of being removed from immediate dangers, threats, and predators, and so can dwell on complex and paramount issues, questions, mysteries, doubts, etc. which are most important to the whole species. Philosophy is a mark of prestige and the highest class, in this way. Other humans merely live out their lives, unaware, and generally meaningless, without ever knowing or becoming aware of anything ‘better’.
All this said, to Silhouette and the OP, if you remain a coward, and continue to withhold your core-believes, values, and metaphysics, then you’ll never really progress in any meaningful way. In order to have disputes, you first have to believe in the thing that you are disputing. There must be something at stake. This is why more common topics, such as sex, are more appealing since the views anybody and everybody has, directly correlate and represent the individual and their status. You can’t have an opinion on sex and sexuality, without having a stake in the game.
Philosophy has been this classically, but is not so in Modernity, which is a grave mistake. Philosophers in previous eras knew, that in addition to building a metaphysical worldview, and after examining all the important points and perspectives, you must then act on what you believe and state. This is why Socrates must “drink the poison”. You must follow-through with your philosophy. If that leads you to a bottle of poison, or ethical dilemmas, abortion, murder, starting World War II, then that is simply the outcome which must follow logically and objectively.
So, to conclude, Philosophy cannot be done when everybody is cowardly and half-arguing. You need to be courageous, lay it all out, what you believe in, and then the arguments need to matter. If you lose, then you must concede to the superior mind, and follow the rationale and logic as proved through exposition. If you continue to believe in contradictions, because you are stupid and/or a coward, then to repeat, Philosophy is not for you. But this is the normal state of things. The Wannabes line-up, the amateurs, the average minds, they “play with” philosophy, but do not actually cross the threshold and DO philosophy.
I question whether you, Silhouette, are even capable to begin with, after our previous arguments and debates about free-will…