What do my readers think of "history of philosophy"?

They seem to like it more than metaphysics!  With over 2000 votes cast, 55% said "history of philosophy is philosophy," being a "central, foundational part of the discipline," with another 25% deeming it an "important area of research"--so fully 80% chose the most positive options.  Another 12% thought it "useful" if it contributes to "contemporary research," while 6% thought it a "minor area of research."  A mere 2% chose the most hostile option:  "just say 'no' to the history of philosophy" (compare that to the 20% who chose the most hostile option for metaphysics).  I confess I wouldn't have predicted these results, but this suggests suppositions some readers make about who reads this blog (or about Anglophone philosophers) are misplaced.

History of philosophy is philosophy: it is a central, foundational part of the discipline.
55%
History of philosophy is an important area of research.
25%
Useful when it contributes to research in contemporary areas.
12%
A minor area, but worth pursuing.
6%
Just say "no" to the history of philosophy!
2%

  - See more at: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/#sthash.qLDZbUlG.dpuf