Some kind of interaction where participants present concrete examples as a way of beginning some discussion or derivation of principled logic underlying or supporting those examples is but one instance of one version of philosophical discourse. I might even go so far as to claim it's one instance of one part of one way of doing philosophical discourse. Probably mostly the analytical part. In fact, the part where the examples were presented probably should be considered as formally distinct from the analytical part. Indeed, if one wanted the analytical part to go well, seeing as how it is focused on some example, there probably should have been some agreement earlier on kinds and types of background knowledge or practice that will be used. (and that agreement can be changed as discussion progresses, but it's worth recognizing it as - seems like - formally distinct from the actual analysis or the example presentation...
Etc and so on and if I keep building on this supposed form, then I'm describing the 4-skills "academic discourse" form again: knowledge, application of knowledge to some situation, analysis of revealed situation, evaluation in light of analytical discoveries....
I wonder how much language one has to learn before one can know they're on the way to that kind of organized speech. (That's kind of a rhetorical wonder because I think the answer is obviously "NONE AT ALL!!!! YOU DON'T NEED ANY AMOUNT OF SECOND LANGUAGE TO KNOW ABOUT ORGANIZING DISCOURSES!!!"
I think it'd be a substantial move forward in language learning if overall organization of language production could be known in advance, or at least gestured toward. People could use pre-existing education to get a cognitive leg up on learning. For the people who don't ordinarily pay that much attention to their daily experiences even in their first language, it'd be a boon.
Or so I speculate.