I have been reading History of Western Philosophy. This book is written by B. Russell, who don’t revere any of the philosopher of the history. He presents them and then immediately demonstrates their short comings, including Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and all.
All the great philosophers of the history had successfully destroyed older doctrines then themselves, by pointing at mistakes made by their predecessors. That is not enough to be well known and noted philosopher. If you only point at mistakes of others then you are only a commentator. To be a great philosopher, you have to device your set of answers of same old-old questions. For example, do we have free will? Even if you do not have any reliable means to answer those questions. All you have to do is to conceive a fresh speculative answer. Correctness is not much relevant but only ‘freshness’ is the only criteria to be noted in the world of philosophy. They were all wrong. Only thing, that they were good at, was speculation.
Philosophy is to be studied not because it can give you any right answers but the study can make you admire the tradition of speculation. This tradition can save you in future from running into any ideological dogmas.
I don't know 