The key question here is “Can a computer think for us?” This can be reformulated as “Will strong AI ever be realized?” Or, “Can human understanding be reduced to a program running on a Turing machine?”
There are two answers: Yes or No.
If Yes, then a program can produce human understanding. Since philosophy is the result of human understanding, philosophy is merely computation.
If No, then a program cannot produce human understanding. Since philosophy is the result of human understanding, philosophy is not merely computation.
We will need more than assertions to resolve this. On the one hand there are people who assert that philosophy is not computation. On the other there are people who assert that strong AI is possible. One of those assertions is false.
John Searle provided a thought experiment called the Chinese Room Argument that opposed the assertion that strong AI was possible. See “Minds, Brains and Programs” for details. This argument is one justification for the No answer as to whether computers might ever be able to think for us.