The Beginning of Western Philosophy

the dead hear silence.

We know from 1, 34–37, how common opinion resorts to hazy seeing and noise-filled hearing and idle talk, according to the predominance of the dark and heavy, i.e., the unlit.

the meaning and weight of a word must always be confirmed and redeemed through knowledge of the essence, a knowledge that at the same time makes understandable the relative justification—indeed, the necessity—of semblance.

Nietzsche’s doom was that he—with all his clarity—misunderstood no other Greek philosopher as completely as he did Parmenides. Consequently, Nietzsche did not later measure up to the proper task!

Philosophy is comprehensive questioning, because it asks the question of Being and asks only that question.

How then is the ἕν the unitary? Because it encompasses all these unities: firstness, sameness, simplicity, uniqueness, wholeness.

In the end, Parmenides and Heraclitus are in the utmost agreement—as are all actual philosophers—not because they renounce battling, but precisely on account of their own respective ultimate originality. For nonphilosophers, who adhere only to works, opinions, schools, names, and claims, the history of philosophy and of philosophers does of course present the appearance [32] of a madhouse. But that can quietly remain as it is. |

Even forgetting cannot deprive Being and the understanding of Being of all dignity. It is still there.

How little do we know of the essence of language?—As little as we know of the essence of Being.

With the word “is,” we indeed mean the Being of beings.