So, is a life which is unexamined worth living?

Many of the other sciences came from philosophy, it kinda gave birth to them, we think, we wounder, we ask why and how and than science proves it right or wrong as best it can. Where would any of this be with out the philosopher?

The word "science" from the Latin meaning "to know" simply did not mean previously what it means now, nor could it have. The scientific method as we know it did not exist then. To discount the changing meaning of words is to ignore the distinction that answers the question. It wasn't until Francis Bacon that there was even anything remotely similar to the scientific method as we now know it, let alone its later refinement by Karl Popper. A "natural philosopher" was in no way equivalent to a scientist as we know today. Hegel, a systemic philosopher, in no way applied the scientific method to his pensive ramblings. I know of no one who reads philosophical books and expects to get answers on a par with with science books, and if they did, it would simply prove that they understood neither philosophy nor science. So, unless you simply enjoy philosophical analysis, stick with science.

Well...if you are looking for answers...stick t Science...if you want to know...WHY...get into philosophy. But, you don't have to READ this philosopher or that philosopher, unless you want to know WHY that person thought or saw things the way they did...and you can develop another perspective. But, you'll gain your BEST philosophical answers through MEDITATION...TRUE MEDITATION. HAVE FUN!

Every human conducts his/her life according to a philosophy. Many, or possibly most, would be hard pressed to articulate that philosophy in any great detail, but if you were to observe their behavior closely for an extended period of time, you would be able to discern patterns that are guided by principles, however simple or complex they may be.

“I just do whatever I feel like at any given moment” is a personal philosophy of life every bit as much as any complicated discipline. We behave according to a pattern of principles that we have chosen, either consciously or unconsciously, and that pattern, by default if nothing else, is our philosophy.

Humans cannot function without some kind of rudimentary philosophy, in addition to, but in no way in competition with, some basic awareness of the ‘facts’ of our environment and our selves.

Philosophy - Greek - love of wisdom
Homo sapiens - Latin - wise man

Our capacity for philosophy is arguably the main distinguishing feature of our species.
Any rat is capable of ‘knowing’ there’s cheese in the trap, but getting it without getting caught requires philosophy: “What risks do I personally feel are justified in the pursuit of my goal, given what I know about the circumstances?”

I think philosophy is about meaning and science is about knowledge. It wasn't always that way. I'll hazard a guess that the separation came with Descartes.

To my mind, today, science is about determining “what is” whereas philosophy is about how to relate to “what is.”
Science describes the building blocks of our world. Philosophy guides our actions.
Science assists knowing.
Philosophy assists understanding.
Knowledge and Wisdom are not antagonistic, but complementary.

It is still essential for the science, the method comes from philosophy, and science is not the facts or the knowledge, but the method.
The lack of knowledge about the method is what creates this anti-scientific movements and even inside the academy generates the reproducibility crisis in some areas.
Very few scientists have the real master on the method, most of them develops techniques that sometimes are questionable.
even inside companies there are mistakes made because lack of understanding scientific method can lock a company for years with a false knowledge that was created due to bias or not controlling all factors.

Or even the phrase "I believe in science" is a philosophical error, because science is not believing in its essence.
AND
There is difference between a philosopher and a philosophy student/teacher. To know what philosophers wrote/discussed is one thing, to produce new knowledge is being a real philosopher. And by this meaning a scientist is just a very specialized philosopher.

Quite agree. (Plus I love the lack of economy and abbreviation in German words. Why have five when you can have one!)

Philosophy opened the door to thinking and exploration and science now addresses the outstanding debates.

For me the importance of philosophy is now to asses from where we have come rather than where we are going.

How can we re-interprete past thinking into the paradigms that science has opened for us.?