I should have been more specific.
To say that the teaching of philosophy should be mandatory strikes me as authoritarian. Saying that it should be a requirement for public office establishes an ideological filter to power, which is unacceptable in a democracy. Given the poor press that philosophy has these days, the chances that this proposal would accepted in Western societies are rather slim. I thought that you said in jest. That’s why I said it is hyperbole.
That last sentence is a non-sequitur because the article is about Socrates and the Stoics. Philosophy is much more than that. If its teaching was mandatory, what would be taught would be Post-Modernism and similar ideologies that are in an open confrontation with science (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars). You just extended ancient Greek philosophy to the whole of philosophy, which is an unwarranted logical jump: a non-sequitur. If your mandatory teaching of philosophy includes this type of logic, I’m out.
Finally, it is self-serving because you are a professor in philosophy who would benefit from making the teaching of philosophy mandatory. It’s like me saying that all college students should learn neuroscience. I understand that you want people to be more knowledgeable in ethics and how to live a good life. However, making this kind of confrontational statements does not advance your cause and probably hinders it.
Your writings in Medium should be much more popular than they are, Massimo. Your ideas are valuable, don’t antagonize your readers unnecessarily. You are not getting many claps or comments, and a lot of those are from me. Isn’t self-criticism part of Stoic philosophy?