of ἀλήθεια comes down to a discussion of the essential steps of the basic movement of the great Greek philosophy, whose beginning and end are attached to the names Anaximander and Aristotle. What later arises as so-called “Greek philosophy” has another character, no longer the original; what we then have are either scholastic trends in the wake of Plato and Aristotle, or practical-moral philosophies like those of the Stoa and Epicurus, or even attempts at a renaissance of the ancient Greek philosophy under the influence of Christian faith or the religious systems of later antiquity, renaissances which go by the name of Neoplatonism. Subsequently, all these “philosophies” became historically more influential than the genuine and originally great Greek philosophy. The ground of this fact resides in the linkage with Christianity. The great Greek philosophy fell more and more into oblivion, and when it was indeed sought out it was completely covered over. That Aristotle became the principal master of “philosophy” in the middle ages does not contradict this, for on the one hand what was called philosophy in medieval times was not philosophy but only a preamble of reason on behalf of theology, as required by faith. And, on the other hand, Aristotle was precisely therefore not understood in the Greek way, i.e., on the basis of the primordial thought and poetry of Greek Dasein, but in a medieval fashion, i.e., in an Arabic-Jewish-Christian way.
The first attempt at a philosophical reflection on the beginning of Western philosophy, and hence on the great philosophy of the Greeks, was carried out by Hegel on the basis of the system he himself elaborated. The second attempt, entirely different in direction and character, is the work of Nietzsche. Yet neither of these two attempts to restore the broken bond with the Greeks—employing a creative recollection to make essential for us what was essential for them, i.e., not merely imitating the Greeks or taking them over—is original enough, because they were not ignited or supported by the question, the one through which the primordial Greek thinking must surpass itself and enter into another beginning.
9. Articulation of the historical recollection in five steps of reflection.
The heart of this question is the question of truth as we have developed it. The carrying out of the recollection of the first shining forth of ἀλήθεια—in the sense of a discussion of the essential steps of the basic movement of the great Greek philosophy between Anaximander and Aristotle—is impossible within the framework of these lectures. ‘To be sure, neither can we take as a substitute the extensive scholarly research of the historiography of philosophy. This research knows all the names and doctrines and writings and presents them time and again. It can draw all the lines of connection between the thinkers and all their