The following is no doubt a bit long, but the argument is certainly worth pondering:
“interpreting the philosophical tradition by means of the Hegelian schema is by now a fixture of our way of thinking. . . . [For example:] As you know, the relationship between Parmenides and Heraclitus is a controversial one. One side tells us that Parmenides criticizes Heraclitus, another side claims that Heraclitus is a critic of Parmenides, and yet another side says that there is probably no historical relationship here at all. Maybe the truth is that neither of the two knew anything of the other. It would not be at all unlikely that they had no connection to each other whatsoever–at least not during their respective periods of creative activity–since, after all, the one lived in Ephesus, the other in Elea. Why has this thesis of mine caused such a stir? The answer is clear: to this day, Hegel has a hand in everything! Even the historian finds it plausible that all things are bound together in the progressive development of knowledge! This historical way of thinking, which arises in the nineteenth century and still appears plausible to us today, seems to me a convincing example of the living Hegelian legacy.”
– Hans-Georg Gadamer, The Beginning of Philosophy (1998), 21-22
Peripatetic Learning 