If that is the case, then why are Aristotle and Plato taught in modern philosophy classes? Why waste time with the ancients when you could go straight to the ideas of more modern, more correct thinkers like Santayana and Kirkegaard?<p>The thing about philosophy is that each philosopher is an individual; philosophy is additive (in the sense that any philosopher is building on, or replying to their predecessors) but not cumulative. There is no set of settled propositions that are universally regarded as correct.<p>The point of the argument of the article is that modern, Western university philosophy departments will not, or can not, include Chinese or Indian philosophers (both have extensive traditions) for example, and so cannot either  evaluate those philosophies or, more importantly, relate them in any way to western philosophy.<p>Or, would you prefer that western mathematicians had never adopted the zero because it came from another culture and therefore could not be correct?