“It is enough to make the general statement that there is not a single woman in the history of thought, not even the most manlike, who can be truthfully compared with men of fifth or sixth-rate genius, for instance with Ruckert as a poet, Van Dyck as a painter, or Schleiermacher as a philosopher.”

— Otto Weininger (1903), Sex and Character (pg. 69)

“Since the time of Schleiermacher the philosophy of Anaximander has received marked attention from historians of philosophy, and the literature on the subject has grown to large proportions. By many Anaximander is regarded as a metaphysician—as the first metaphysician. In this essay the attempt will be made to study the records, so far as they may conceivably be regarded as containing a metaphysical scheme, without express reference to other interpretations, although they have been conscientiously read and considered. The treatise of Anaximander was known to Aristotle and Theophrastus; there is no reason to think that it was studied by later writers for the purpose of ascertaining his opinions,' although Apollodorus may have inspected it with a view to determine his chronology. Theophrastus remarks upon its high-flown style,' which suggests that it was not discursive but, like that of Heraclitus, somewhat curt and aphoristic. We must therefore look to Aristotle and Theophrastus for a knowledge of the facts; but we shall be under the necessity of somehow checking their conclusions, the more since it is no longer a secret that Theophrastus was absolutely under the spell of his master, and that Aristotle himself, with all his speculative genius, or just because of it, was not always able to distinguish between that which his predecessors said and that which their words suggested to him.”

— W.A. Heidel (1912), “On Anaximander” [1]