"Philosophical writing is bourn from examination of the world in which we all live."
Had you phrased that differently, I could agree absolutely--like so--
"Philosophical writing is born from perception of the world in which we all live." That simple substitution of word would have made the second and third statements more accurate to my point of view--
"Throughout life one has many experiences and sensations that involve both the physical and the metaphysical. Looking at and beyond the surface of everyday experience the philosopher formulates questions based on such experience or on a related body of work that lends itself to empathy."
Empathy being key, for me.
"Through contemplation and investigation the philosopher then establishes a position and in some instances a new or elaborated theory concerning the issue(s) that has presented itself."
Um, yeah. That works for me until a mirror falls on my head.
"Following with an argument in support of this theory the philosopher aims to convince his contemporaries thereby creating the potentiality for innovations in the various categories of existence or about the whole itself."
I've got problems with that. I suppose because I take into consideration that first issue of perception--because I believe that if we respect the individual eye of perception, then we must acknowledge, at the very least, the idea, that there is no absolutely correct definition of life or philosophy. All of our experience is tainted by all of our experience.
And for the record, I dropped Philosophy 101 before it would affect my grade point average. The professor was actually sad to see me go too.
He asked me why, and I told him I didn't have the diligence to back up the things I thought with quotations and research--perhaps if it was all I had to do, I could, but not at that time.
I was flattered when he told me that he enjoyed the absolute freshness of what I thought was discovery.
(And I was dumb enough then to feel flattered.)
I had no idea then, nor do I have any idea now that there are names to methods of argument, and that they are considered "freshman" silliness.
I just enjoy the discussion.
And I confess, I hang out here mostly 'cause I miss my Dad and my brother.
Some things are really that simple.
So in answer to your question, do I agree?
Sure, but with editorial privelage.