> I don't see how that would benefit anyone more than the current situation, where a degree program will typically require one or two philosophy classes.
From the point of view of students, it might be the same. From the point of view of the administration, not having to maintain a separate degree program and all the bureaucracy that comes with it frees up a lot of resources that could be better spent on other things. From the point of view of the importance of philosophy, I think it sends a better message to everyone when philosophy is officially "everywhere" than when it's confined to a tiny, chronically underfunded department known only to a select few who care about it.
> Did it seem to you that philosophy drew the kind of students (other than you, of course) who had no "force" to multiply, such that the philosophy degree program was a waste of time for them?
Fortunately, most people naturally have a range of interests.
But even if all you want to do is analyze a certain passage from Plato for the rest of your life, I wouldn't say that it's a total waste of time. That passage from Plato then becomes the force that you multiply, no matter how close to zero everyone else thinks its value is. There's a place for that kind of dedication in academia, and the true value of their work might not be apparent until centuries later. Humanity needs people like them. Our civilization can afford to subsidize them. Just not too many of them.
For 99.9% of people who have ever studied philosophy, I think the goal should be to use that knowledge to live a good life, make a difference in the world, and teach others to do the same. Focusing too much on an academic career distorts the picture.