Is Zhe Xue dead?

"The Master said: “The noble man is all-embracing and not partial. The inferior man is partial and not all-embracing” (Analects 2:14).

Yes, the ideal man, is indeed widely competent, and not only limited to a single, particular purpose. As it was mentioned, the ideal man is not an implement, or a tool of a single use, for instead he/she covers an extending breadth of can-do's. 

But nowadays, it seems like such principle was already buried far off under the ground; the people of today seems not to see their selves as some sort of a versatile kind of being, but rather they assume that they are crafted and molded to do a particular task. If they are to become an engineer, they become engineer. If they want to be a specialized doctor, they become a specialized doctor. Nothing more, nothing less. But actually, it is worse than that. What does it mean then?

It was because of what scholars of philosophy and societal studies referred as the "excessive professionalization". Excessive professionalization is the massive division and segmentation of human labor. If one is to be an engineer, it doesn't mean that he will cover all the concepts and practices of engineering, but rather he is only expected to do a specific task like that of being assigned to illustration or blueprint-making, or worse, is appointed to a definite task in making a blue-print (e.g. measuring the sides). Yes, humorous it may seem but it is the reality. 

Even in the study of philosophy; In the old times philosophy was a calling: it only attracted amateurs enamored of general problems. From that of the Kantian times, philosophy has become a profession. Technical competence, and the attendant caution, often replace the philosopher's passion of seeking what is to be sought. The philosophy chairs have become so plentiful that most of them are controlled by persons with neither avocation or desire nor vision. Worse, since employment and promotion depend on publication, far too many philosophical productions are potboilers, hence boring or sometimes irritating. Thus, the profession has been filled with functionaries that are neither advancing philosophy nor even transmitting the enthusiasm of the said study of search.

Does this mean that the primal essence of philosophy is somehow dead during the present times? Since the ideal man, which is the character of the Confucian philosophy, that is considered to be "all-embracing", is not followed by the people today, is it to conclude that philosophy, as what it was defined, doesn't exist nowadays?  Are we to restore such lost, and forgotten idea of the said study? Or are we to just live it out and go with the teeming flow of such new change, and somehow create a new philosophy instead? What do you think?