A Santayanan Verdict

On the macro level, Democritus provided us with an adequate inventory of the universe: atoms, void, and opinion. But on closer inspection, we find that there is more at play where human opinion is concerned: the "more" of opinion cannot be lightly dismissed as so much wind--Democritus himself was not so simple-minded (although here, as in much of the Democritean corpus, it is difficult to discern genuine attributions from spurious).

As the Sophists demonstrated, we ignore opinion only at our peril. But what opinions are worthy of us and how shall we decide? This is what Heidegger called "deciding to have a conscience"--and in this regard, as in so much else, we cannot do better at the present moment than look to him for guidance. For Heidegger proceeds by way of questioning: of asking hitherto unasked questions--hitherto "unaskable" questions--and therein lies his strength and (if we accept it) our own.

A Santayanan verdict: By all means, let us enjoy Democritean, Aristophanic, laughter; but let us not neglect for a moment Heideggerian seriousness in all sincerity.