I don’t disagree with your basic premise of the split between philosophical and scientific modes of inquiry, but I would have enjoyed more detail as to the specific issues you think are a challenge today. I kept looking for examples which I found lacking. I would refine your postulate a little bit. LGBTQ issues are more a function of psychology than philosophy. Philosophy is applicable in terms of understanding the metaphysics of how this particular group fits into society, but but is less relevant to an explanation of why these particular orientations occur. Psychology has wrestled with it indirectly. The original assumption was that gayness and trans Ness were mental pathologies which could be cured through appropriate therapeutic modes. It was only when these attempts failed miserably that attitudes were modified, leading to the current understanding that these characteristics are an innate part of people, not a choice. That is an advance, but not the whole picture. The current investigations being done in genetics, medical science, and neuro and bio chemistry are expanding our knowledge and pointing in the direction that certain trans genes and actual brain structure and operation, in particular, are more similar to those of the gender with which a person identifies than with their primary sex characteristics. Advances in these area could dramatically reshape the current debates and lead to greater understanding and acceptance. In any case I appreciate you raising the issue. I also agree with you that a multidisciplinary approach and educating people with multidisciplinary training is a good thing. Specialists tend to be blind to work being done around them which also affects the the solutions to the larger problems encompassing the areas they are researching.