I like these types of questions, at least as Community Wiki, because they can be really interesting.
However, the original question was rambling and without a real point. You've improved it, but I still think it's rambling and vague. All that lead-up to the question about technical vs artistic: he mentions not being able to capture a moment, doing B&W, abusing DOF, post-processing. Are those technical things? Artistic? Both? What's the problem he's trying to solve? Is it just a bit of a rant?
On the other hand, this question
Is technical perfection necessary for an artistically awe-inspiring photograph?
asks a very specific question, even giving specific examples of what he considers the artistic side of things vs technical (defects in this case).
I think that question covers the same ground, probably a duplicate even. If you disagree, then I'd leave this question closed and pen your own question that targets what the above question didn't.
Sorry, maybe it's just me, but I read that question and I just can't tell what he's exactly talking about. Then you ask a good question (albeit too broad probably) but all that lead-in to the question really muddles it in my mind. Great topic, but worst possible question formation possible IMO.