I agree that philosophy as a tool can be used as a source against injustice, but I also ask whether it can be used as a source of injustice itself. Philosophy as a concept is the method to which idea itself is introduced, and with every idea there is always an opposite. Many may learn to be aware of injustice and cast actions against it, but just as many may learn that inciting injustice is beneficial to them, and thus philosophy no longer serves as an antidote to said injustice. How do we attempt to only teach ideas that would serve as an antidote and avoid falling into a trap of philosophy leading to more suffering?

Opening the essay with a hypothetical is a powerful way to incite an image into the reader's head, allowing them to really ponder about the situation that the writer wishes to emphasize. However, this last ending question feels out of place, the concept of philosophy feels completely unrelated to what was being explained earlier. In what moment of this person's daily routine would they be able to think about the positive aspects of philosophy? It is unknown whether this was the intention, but I believe the article should have started with a hypothetical more relevant to their topic of discussion: philosophy.