Jeri... folks who would rather 'just talk' should, of course, just do so. Serious philosophers don't expect the average person to go to the trouble of sorting thru the arcane language of metaphysics, epistemology and phenomenology...etc. But it is frustrating to hear them dismissing those studies as ".. about taking something simple, and making it as convoluted as possible, and nearly impossible to understand" and calling it names like 'gobbledegook'.
   When I was a graduate teaching fellow for 2 years, our department made every effort to give those who took Philosophy 101 a basis for appreciating the relevance of the questions and the historical significance of the attempts at answers. Entire political systems draw on some of the most complex answers... and just today I saw this article on physics that uses philosophic logic to help answer the more frustrating things about physics... by reducing the number of answers to the 'possible'.
   I once worked in a software company which...briefly... sought to introduce me to programming. I simply could not wrap my head around the jargon, rules and exceptions to the rules... but I learned to be a pretty good operator of software stuff... just as I can drive many types of vehicles while being a total duffer at anything to do with repairing them... I can barely change the oil.

   All I really wish is to reduce the amount of linguistic fuzzing of the word 'philosophy' and the equivocation of the term... just as I hate reducing 'folk' music to mean whatever suits someone's subjective idea.

I guess that, like Sisyphus, I have my own rocks to roll... ;>)