ures ▁are ▁equally ▁advanced ." ▁ ▁Gar field ▁and ▁Van ▁Norden ' s ▁article ▁was ▁almost ▁immediately ▁translated ▁into ▁Chinese , ▁and ▁over ▁twenty ▁blog s ▁in ▁the ▁English - spe aking ▁world ▁have ▁commented ▁or ▁hosted ▁discuss ions , ▁including ▁Red dit . ▁ ▁Gar field ▁and ▁Van ▁Norden ' s ▁piece ▁has ▁continued ▁to ▁prov oke ▁strong ▁re actions . ▁ ▁Some ▁have ▁app la ud ed ▁their ▁call ▁for ▁greater ▁divers ity ▁in ▁the ▁US ▁philosoph ical ▁canon . ▁ ▁In ▁addition , ▁their ▁piece ▁has ▁been ▁featured ▁in ▁several ▁recent ▁ess ays ▁arg uing ▁for ▁greater ▁divers ity ▁in ▁philosophy . ▁ ▁However , ▁there ▁has ▁also ▁been ▁extensive ▁criticism ▁of ▁the ▁Gar field ▁and ▁Van ▁Norden ▁article . ▁ ▁Two ▁conserv ative ▁editor ial s ▁critic ized ▁the ▁piece ▁for ▁failing ▁to ▁acknow ledge ▁the ▁superior ity ▁of ▁Western ▁philosophy . ▁ ▁Two ▁other ▁articles ▁argued ▁that ▁" ph il osoph y " ▁is , ▁by ▁definition , ▁the ▁tradition ▁that ▁grows ▁out ▁of ▁Pl ato ▁and ▁Arist ot le , ▁so ▁nothing ▁outside ▁that ▁tradition ▁could ▁count ▁as ▁philosophy . ▁ ▁The ▁editor ▁of ▁the ▁Daily N ous ▁blog ▁suggested ▁the ▁following ▁typ ology ▁of ▁other ▁critic isms ▁of ▁the ▁original ▁article : ▁the ▁philosoph ical ▁equivalent ▁of ▁the ▁" All ▁L ives ▁M atter ” ▁( parts ▁of ▁Ang lo - Europe an ▁philosophy ▁are ▁also ▁neglect ed ) ▁criticism , ▁the ▁" Don ' t ▁Be ▁Pres um pt uous " ▁( in ▁project ing