If there’s a Society for Applied Philosophy, that implies that there must be such a thing as Non-Applied Philosophy. Further, it implies that Non-Applied Philosophy is the dominant mode of philosophy, or the Applied Philosophy folks wouldn’t need a sectarian split-off in the form of their own Society.

This situation is highly disturbing to my philosophy.

Good.

Society for Applied Philosophy session “Applying Plumbing Principles and Procedures to Financial Instrument Failures”

Better.

Society for Applied Philosophy session “1001 Uses for Cheez Whiz For the Upcoming Depression”

Best.

The philosophical position that one should be rigorously honest and truthful in personal conduct and in public affairs begs for application to the corrupt modern business and political communities. Since abundant Internet mechanisms exist for a radical increase of transparency in all institutional activities, this bit of philosophy can be very easily applied.

Were Obama’s public works programs to include construction of monuments to the obvious, this would be a prominent one.

btw, I don’t think the quality of a discussion depends on the size of the audience, but rather on the quality of the participants. I’ve been in very small audiences (as small as 5 or 6 people) with a great discussion, and in larger audiences (20, 30, or more people) with a shallow discussion. So far I don’t think there is any significant positive correlation between the size of the audience and the quality of the discussion, at least after you cross a treshhold which may lie around, say, 5 people.