Philosophy is best conducted face-to-face, because it is in the continual back-and- forth of learning and teaching that takes place in conversation that we make the most progress. The opportunity to reply to a charitable and yet challenging review of one’s book, I have now discovered, is a surprisingly close approximation to face-to-face philosophy. This is all the more true when I have already learned from the reviewer’s teachers, was responding (in part) to them in my book, and now Thorian Harris offers his own perspective. I hope that my replies here, and Harris’s subsequent rejoinder, can help make the conversation that much more constructive. I will focus on two points: the issue of whether concrete exemplars drop out of my account in favor of an abstract ideal of sagehood, and the question of whether my account is too individualist, perhaps because of my drawing too much on a “virtue ethics” framework.