Ok - so in cold hard fact-based discoveries, they are a bit lacking. The didn't discover silicon and thereby usurp the Gates monster that lived in the hills of Athens. That's one way of looking at it. Which is fair. More than fair. Yes.

Newton's gravity was an extension of the teleological argument. He said as much.

The Theory of Forms is an underlying principle of any discourse - everyone appeals to the Platonic notion of the theory of forms.

Our political systems are footnotes to Aristotle's Politics - that is, 'Politics' is a sophisticated version of the same principles which Aristotle set out.

Any dialectical relationship (including this one here) is founded on the principles of discourse as set out by Socrates (or by Plato in last days of Socrates).

The notion of a systematic ethics, which is precisely why people go wrong with ethics, in so far as they often fail to see that their ethics are emotional responses and not a priori rational systems, comes from Greek philosophy.

The term 'Platonic' comes from Plato - although it is not merely a synonym for agape.

It is worth bearing in mind that the notion of a systematic philosophy, the notion of philosophy as we know it, in its variegated forms, is entirely dependant upon Greek developments.

Sure, ok, I agree that in terms of properly scientific discovery they didn't discover a great deal. But in terms of the principles underlying EVERY SINGLE DISCOURSE, one cannot dismiss the Greeks (particularly Plato). The only figure in the history of philosophy who can match them for the unconscious effect they've had on the entire existence of our thinking is Descartes - metaphysically speaking, Cogito ergo sum (never said by Descartes) is something to which the majority of people appeal (whether knowingly or otherwise).

You Sophist.

aristotle, without a doubt.