No, my not replying was not tacit agreement with Gordon's assessment of professional philosophy, and I suspect some other panelists also disagree. We're philosophers--you'll always find differences of opinion. But, looking back at his answer, he simply said there are some people who enjoy the puzzle-solving aspect of philosophy, not that all or most of professional philosophy works that way. I suspect that many or most professional philosophers enjoy both the puzzle solving and the engagement with the big questions about the meaning of life, morality, what we are, etc., and many probably like the intersection of the puzzles with the big questions. But trying to find a single accurate description of philosophy or philosophers or even academic philosophy is like trying to find a single accurate description of the meaning of life. Ain't gonna happen.

Having said all this, I am sometimes disappointed at the rarity of professional philosophers who are able to connect their academic research to the philosophical questions that most ordinary people think about and find engaging (or did when they were kids!). But we can't all be Socrates.