This text examines the traditional distinction between creative philosophers and those who focus on interpreting the work of others. The author argues that this division is often misleading because the two activities are inextricably linked. No philosopher can construct an original system without understanding and interpreting their predecessors; conversely, a proper interpretation requires a solid philosophical foundation of one's own. Therefore, the significant difference lies not in the emphasis on creativity versus interpretation, but in the authenticity of thought. The true contrast exists between the genuine philosopher and the epigone or pseudo-philosopher. While epigones mimic others and claim to know exactly what philosophy is, a creative thinker constantly re-evaluates their own philosophy and self. This reflective process may lead the philosopher onto paths considered deviant by academic traditions. The document emphasizes that philosophy is a continuous process of self-examination and critical inquiry rather than mere imitation, eclecticism, or the mechanical adoption of existing ideas.