Do academic philosophers write about anything besides other philosophers? Kripke, Dummett, Foucault, Wright, Rawls, the list goes on and on. Like denizens of a closed-off room, these dilettantes can breathe only their self-made stench.
Open a window, for God's sake! Out in the sunshine you might find Thoreau, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein—all romping about, and giving a rat's ass for their fellow philosophers. But no, behind these heavy curtains we find Dennett, Searle, Rorty—each waxing ad nauseam on...Dennett, Searle, Rorty (not to mention, waxing ad nauseam on Thoreau, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein).
Why would anyone strive to become a philosopher for the purpose of regurgitating other philosophers? Can these professors not think for themselves?
Maybe Derrida, you say—maybe he is the exception. Well, here too we are stuck in the morass of other philosophers, although I admit the approach is unique. But what can it say about modern philosophy to know that its con artists are the most creative?