This is a hypothetical question and, as such, it cannot be answered with certainty. This, however, does not make it any less useful for thinking about possible scenarios and their consequences. It concerns both the contemporary and the enduring value and role of philosophy. The question was raised some years ago by Professor Theodosis Pelegrinis and prompted me to write a text that was later included in the teachers' guide for teaching Philosophy in Greek upper secondary schools. If doctors or sanitation workers went on strike, the consequences would immediately be felt by all of us. But what if philosophers went on strike? Most likely, we would notice no immediate change. But does that mean philosophy is a superfluous activity? Quite the contrary. That text put forward the argument that our conceptions of knowledge, justice, freedom, and the value of life have been shaped through a long history of ideas, in which philosophers have played, and continue to play, an important role. Even when we are unaware of this history and the role of philosophers in it, our decisions and actions presuppose principles and assumptions that can be traced back to earlier philosophical theories. A strike by philosophers would not erase this legacy. It would, however, limit our own ability to interpret events that are taking place or have already taken place, and to re-examine older theories, giving them new meanings that respond to our own world.

Today, our own world is characterised by extremely rapid technological developments. When the conditions of our lives change radically while our concepts, values, and criteria remain unexamined, intellectual inertia could have consequences that, by the time they became visible, would be difficult to reverse or could only be remedied at considerable economic, social, and political cost. A strike by philosophers, therefore, would leave a gap precisely where we need to think about the terms of this transformation and give new meaning to old values.

Of course, this is an answer that raises new questions and leaves room for counterarguments. If you would like to exercise your argumentation skills, read the following publications and think about your own answer to this particular question.

Further reading in Greek:

Why Do We Need Philosophy Today?
What Will a Philosophy Degree Be Worth in the Age of Artificial Intelligence?

A few years ago, the American investor Mark Cuban, also known for his association with the Dallas Mavericks, predicted that by 2030 a degree in the humanities, particularly in philosophy, would be worth more than a degree in computer science. This prediction struck many as paradoxical, perhaps even provocative. However, if we think about it carefully, it is not as radical as it might first appear.
Artificial Intelligence is already achieving the "automation of automation" to a considerable extent. It writes and corrects code and creates applications and tools that once required specialised programmers. This means that purely technical skills may gradually lose some of their value. What will never lose its value, however, is the "direction" we give these machines. And this is not a technical matter. It is a matter of values, which can only be safeguarded through the humanities. A philosophical education will always help us examine the goals, assumptions, and values on which we base our decisions and ask machines to do what they are good at doing.

Cuban's prediction invites us to consider whether, in the future, what will be more valuable is the ability to perform specific tasks or the ability to understand and judge which tasks are worth performing.

Read the following publications and think about your own answer.

Further reading in Greek:

What Will a Philosophy Degree Be Worth in the Age of Artificial Intelligence?
Henry Shevlin: What Business Does a Philosopher Have at DeepMind?
Joseph Sifakis: Artificial Intelligence and the Role of Philosophers

In April 2026, Google DeepMind announced the appointment of Henry Shevlin, a philosopher specialising in cognition and the ethics of Artificial Intelligence. What makes this case interesting is not simply his appointment, but also his official job title: Philosopher. So, what business does a philosopher have in an Artificial Intelligence company? A first, obvious answer is that these companies need specialists to address issues concerning human values, safety, transparency, and the potential social implications of their technologies. After all, this is not a new practice. Philosophers such as Damon Horowitz at Google in the past and Amanda Askell at Anthropic today have done exactly that. However, Shevlin's case is particularly interesting for another reason. His work involves questions concerning machine consciousness, human interaction with AI, and the future development of Artificial General Intelligence. Questions such as "What is cognition?", "What does understanding mean?", and "Can a machine have conscious experience?" are now returning to the forefront of research.

This may suggest that philosophy has more to offer contemporary research than its already significant contribution to shaping ethical and regulatory frameworks. Do you agree?

Read the following publications and think about your own answer.

Further reading in Greek:

Henry Shevlin: What Business Does a Philosopher Have at DeepMind?
Joseph Sifakis: Artificial Intelligence and the Role of Philosophers
Why Do We Need Philosophy Today?
What Will a Philosophy Degree Be Worth in the Age of Artificial Intelligence?

When Karl Popper read some texts by philosophers of the famous Frankfurt School that were popular in the 1960s, he argued that if we translated them into "plain" language, these texts would say almost nothing. He believed that philosophers should be ashamed of the pointless intellectual wanderings they put their audiences through, which often made no sense at all. If philosophy is not understandable to the public, it becomes an inward-looking activity that has nothing to offer to philosophy itself or to science, let alone to our everyday lives. This is particularly important when, in our everyday lives, the amount of high-quality information reaching each of us is so limited. Instead, we are usually overwhelmed by information overload, which increases the level of "stupidity" in the world. Philosophy that speaks the language of ordinary people may not only serve as an antidote to this situation but also contribute to rational decision-making in our everyday lives.

In a series of short, simple, and accessible articles, I tried to show how philosophical problems from the past, when they reappear in public debate, can help us think more clearly. In my view, the most important contribution of philosophy to everyday life is not that it provides us with ready-made and easy answers, but that it helps us critically examine the answers we take for granted and that limit our intellectual abilities. To distinguish facts from interpretations, to recognise the errors in our reasoning that keep us trapped in comfortable certainties, and to engage in intellectual exercises that improve our thinking and strengthen our decision-making processes through reason.

Read the following publications and consider how philosophy might influence your own everyday life (in Greek):
Philosophy as an Answer to Stupidity
Why Do We Need Philosophy Today?
Philosophy as Therapy: The Red Herring Argument
Hannah Arendt: The "Heretical" Philosopher and the Banality of Evil
Philosophy as Therapy: After the End of Certainty
Philosophy as Therapy: Death and the Meaning of Life
Philosophy as Therapy: The Jungle and the Calculator of Pleasures
Philosophy as Therapy: Godzillas in the Mist

An interdisciplinary research team of three researchers walks into a bar to determine which beer is the best. One researcher examines the relationship between price and alcohol content, another interviews the bartender and the customers, while a third tries to taste every beer. The next day, no one can agree on the results. Someone asks what the research hypothesis was in the first place, and another replies: "Who needs a research hypothesis?" Naturally, no study was published. Philosophers Brian Robinson and Michael O’Rourke recount this joke to illustrate the difficulties of "mutual understanding" among researchers from different scientific disciplines, which often create problems of knowledge integration in interdisciplinary collaborations.

In my postdoctoral research, I argued that a significant part of these difficulties arises not so much from communication problems as from the different epistemological and metaphysical assumptions through which scientists approach their subject matter. Different conceptions of what constitutes knowledge, how a scientific claim is justified, or what the relationship between theory and reality is can lead to substantial divergences. This is precisely where philosophy can make a contribution. Philosophical analysis allows us to identify these underlying assumptions, understand points of convergence or divergence, and create the conditions for more effective collaboration.

Read more in the following publications and try the EPR diagnostic tool to develop your own epistemological profile. Compare it with the profile of one of your colleagues and then try to formulate your own answer to the question of the role of philosophy in interdisciplinary research.

The Role of Philosophy in Interdisciplinary Research and the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Addressing Epistemological and Meaning-Related Challenges
The Diagnosis of Epistemological Stances and the Epistemic Virtue Index in Interdisciplinary Research

Try the tool:
Epistemological Profile Radar (EPR) – Diagnostic Tool for Epistemological Stances