Philosopher = Artist + Scientist

[martins name]

An artist takes the unknown into the known unknown through intuition. A scientist takes known unknowns into the known through reason. 
A philosopher takes both steps, from the unknown to the known unknown to the known. However, a philosopher doesn't wander as deep into the unknown as an artist can and doesn't create the level of certainty/knowing that a scientist does.

This is oversimplified ofc.

First in life, I thought I wanted to be a scientist, specifically a mathematician. Then I decided to become a game programmer to be in the middle of art and the technicality of programming. It's clear to me now that I was meant to be a philosopher all along. 
Leo took a similar path. He started off wanting to be an aerospace engineer. Then became a game designer and ended up becoming a philosopher. I know he did take a detour in academic philosophy but academia doesn't count. They don't do real philosophy.

[Leo Gura]

Philosopher is not necessarily an artist. Most are not.

Edited March 13 by Leo Gura

[martins name]

@Leo Gura Nor are they necessarily a scientist, but my point is they share the intuition and rationality of both. I think that great artists don't understand their art. It comes from the furthest edges of their intuition, that which is only a feeling and not yet an articulated thought. Great philosophy starts at that same place. Artists enact what they find and thus bring it into the known unknown. Artists explain what they find and bring it all the way to the known.

This is an oversimplification, but a powerful one.

[Abe27]

Very interesting, i see math also being quite a creative subject, if you become good at it. The typical "creative" subjects often have a major unknowen unknowen to the part of being seemingly unaware of the rigors of the methods used. Where math is much more straighted out, and hyper aware of the methods, and their meaning.

[LSD-Rumi]

 

Do philosophers generally have strong imaginative abilities? I'm beginning to recognize that the average human tends to fall short when it comes to imagination.

[bebotalk]

Artists can represent things that are known, or different takes on things that are known. 

Philosophers look at real life phenomenon and analyse it from various angles. I don't think they take unknown things and make them known. It's not like science, which itself derived from philosophy. Science has firm conclusions. Philosophy doesn't. Nobody can say that moral subjectivism is more correct than moral objectivism. Or whether God exists.