Abstract

This paper will attempt to elucidate a problem present from the 20th century onwards: that is, a gatekeeping of what it means to be a philosopher, and the objective of this essay is to show that the term “armchair philosopher” is the direct result of such gatekeeping, when in reality, philosophy is not about prestigious titles, or even the institution one attends or has attended; it is about thinking and offering new perspectives, a novel idea, that perhaps shows what another philosopher, or society, has overlooked. If that is the case, does the armchair philosopher truly exist, or are they just philosophers who come from the non-traditional route?