A week ago, physicist Mark Perakh posted a short attack on Michael Ruse. He prefaced it with the following:
I dare to claim that the sole value of philosophy of science is its entertaining ability. I doubt that all the multiple opuses debating various aspects of the philosophy of science have ever produced even a minute amount of anything that could be helpful for a scientist, be he/she physicist, biologist, geologist, you name it. It can, though, be harmful, as the case of Ruse seems to illustrate.
This struck a few of us involved with PT as being a profoundly nonsensical statement. Now, philosopher John Wilkins offers a defense of philosophy.