Should this site be restricted to academic answers only?

Question

If this site is intended for discussion of philosophy, then perhaps it would be appropriate to strive for academic answers to questions, even when the questions are not academic themselves. However, as an autodidact whose understanding of philosophy comes from reading and thinking, with a lack of academic discussion on the concepts, but with much informal discussion on the concepts with other readers and thinkers, I would personally find a requirement for academic answers crippling, even in the case where it's decided that this site is only for discussion and not doing. Quoting of texts is great, and links for clarification on the academic definition of concepts is fine, but I would hope that sometimes an informal, conversational, answer by a non-academic can hit the nail right on the head for some users.

Further, is it not an unfair constraint to the general doing of philosophy by our users, who may not be academics, to demand that answers to questions be stated in the context of academia's perspective on the pre-existing philosophical corpus? Certainly, many philosophers of the past—while not operating completely in a void, insofar as their society was likely influenced by past philosophers—did not have printed materials nor anything resembling academia to reference or educate when constructing their arguments. And yet, while they may have covered a lot of the same ground, we respect some of the different conclusions they've come to.

Note: I am using the vocabulary of the question of whether this site is for doing philosophy or discussing philosophy in this one, as the answers to this question may also imply answers to that one. Also, I am using the terms academic and academia in reference to the current state of higher education; i.e., the modern university system.

Answer 1

A well articulated answer is critical. An articulated answer that demonstrates awareness of the literature is even more useful, as it helps people learn from the sources of the discipline.

On the nature of the site: my mod over at RPG.SE says: "The core use case of a stack exchange is people asking real questions they need answered, and other experts helping them with their question. Anything else gets short shrift from me..." (Says @mxyzplk)

In order to usefully answer a question, it need not be situated in the academic literature, but must be articualted, demonstrate an awareness of the problem and problem space, and some considerations of why and how the answer was arrived at. While it's certainly possible for an amateur to derive such an understanding (and some of the best novel understandings come from that direction) a lack of domain expertise or an awareness of the common problems encountered by that type of answer to that type of problems simply isn't useful.

This site is neither for doing nor for discussing philosophy: it is for answering philosophical problems by experts. If there is literature on the topic, fantastic. If there isn't, we can still take a stab. However, I'm not interested in reading an answer that assumes on the basis of a few minutes of thought that they've achieved some sort of genuine enlightenment. I demand domain awareness (if not mastery nor expertise) and having someone answer without that awareness is an insulting waste of time.

Answer 2

The only difference to me between "academic” and layman is one has more years and experience and thus may tend to use a lot of technical language that the layman does not understand. When speaking to lay persons, it is the responsibility of the "expert" to make herself understood to the lay person.

This should not be a site where only experts confer with each other (nor should such expert conferences be disallowed). Rather we academics must show how what you call "doing philosophy" can be enriched by a deep and disciplined approach that is designed to lure in learners and thinkers and not deflect them. We need a Neil deGrasse Tyson of philosophy, and we need for the specialists to not deride those popularizers.

Don't misunderstand me. It's valuable to have a place where people in the discipline can ask questions of other specialists. After all, I might be a specialist in continental philosophy and a layman in analytic philosophy, but there has to be some integration between the specialists, the relative lay persons, and the persons who are ALSO interested the big questions but cannot ask them from an expert perspective.