Scott Adams introduced the term philosotainment for things he is doing e.g. with his book God's Debris.
Interesting term ... in his words:
It’s philosophy for the sole purpose of entertainment, not enlightenment. And it doesn’t try to be right, or further our understanding of reality. In fact, the best arguments of philosotainment are clearly wrong, but no two people can agree why. Sorting it out is the point. The fun of philosotainment is in finding out something about your own thinking compared to your fellow humans. The particular topic of discussion is nothing but the vehicle for that journey.
You wouldn’t criticize a jigsaw puzzle because it comes in many pieces and you have to assemble it yourself. That’s the point of the puzzle. But until I labeled my writing philosotainment, many of you figured it was just broken philosophy, or bad humor, or some damned thing you couldn’t put a finger on.
Many people complained in their comments that it “doesn’t matter” if we have free will, or if the universe is intelligence, or whatever the topic. I agree. And it doesn’t matter if you assemble a jigsaw puzzle either. The right answer never matters when it comes to philosotainment. It’s all about the conversation.