By: Dr. Adnan Bozan

Introduction:

The concept of return has always been present in Greek thought, whether in mythology or philosophy. It manifests in the tales of heroes returning from adventures, as in Homer’s Odyssey, and in the reflections of philosophers on movement, cyclical time, and existence. For the Greeks, the idea of return goes beyond a superficial understanding of cyclical time; it becomes a metaphysical inquiry tied to identity, change, and knowledge. This study explores the notion of return, moving beyond traditional metaphysics and opening the way to the ultimate question of existence.

At its core, return is not merely a physical movement or a simple retrieval of past moments; it is a profound existential experience that touches upon the structure of time and being. In Greek thought, time was not linear but circular, where events recur according to eternal patterns. This idea is embodied in myths that speak of eternal recurrence and rebirth. It is clearly illustrated in the Odyssey, where Odysseus’ return to Ithaca becomes a journey of knowledge that transcends space and time. His return is not merely a reclaiming of home but an exploration of a changing identity, forged through pain and experience.

Greek philosophers approached the concept of return from multiple perspectives. For Heraclitus, the idea of perpetual change is central: "No man ever steps in the same river twice," implying that return is never to the exact same point but to a renewed version of reality. Plato, on the other hand, associated return with his theory of recollection, where return is not just about place but about retrieving lost knowledge from the world of Forms. Aristotle viewed return in terms of motion and natural change, where purposes are fulfilled through cycles of transformation.

These perspectives go beyond conventional notions of return, revealing its deeper philosophical dimensions: Is return truly possible, or is it merely an illusion created by our perception of time? Does repetition signify restoration or renewal? Are we the same individuals when we return, or do we return as different beings? Such questions position return not merely as a temporal framework but as a challenge to concepts of identity, being, and transformation. This study seeks to explore these inquiries through an in-depth analysis of mythology and philosophy, aiming to understand return as a fundamental movement within the structure of existence.

Return in Greek Mythology: The Dialectic of Time and Fate

The concept of return is one of the most significant themes in Greek mythology, particularly in stories like The Odyssey, which depicts the journey of the hero Odysseus back to his homeland after the Trojan War. These myths reflect the nature of time and the existential cycle that humans undergo in their pursuit of truth and fulfillment. In this context, return is a recurring act that expresses both a connection to the past and an aspiration toward the future.

Return is a central concept in Greek mythology, where it intertwines with deeper ideas related to fate, identity, punishment, and the human experience as a whole. It is not merely a movement in space but a journey through time, a test of the self, and a revelation of truths that the hero can only grasp through pain and tribulation. This notion is evident in numerous Greek myths that depict heroes returning not only to their homelands but also to their true selves or even to deeper existential truths.

1. The Odyssey: Return as a Test of Identity

Homer’s Odyssey is the most renowned example of the concept of return in Greek mythology and literature. Odysseus’ return to Ithaca is not just a physical restoration of his home but a reclaiming of his true self after undergoing a series of trials that make him aware of the nature of existence and human suffering. His journey is not merely physical but a transformation that prepares him to regain his kingdom and reunite with his wife, Penelope. Here, return takes on a philosophical dimension that transcends mere nostalgia for home; it becomes a final test that affirms the hero’s identity and restores order after chaos.

2. Orpheus and Eurydice: The Impossible Return

In contrast to Odysseus’ successful return, the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice turns return into a tragic impossibility. Orpheus descends into the underworld to bring back his wife, Eurydice, and Hades grants him the chance to restore her, provided that he does not look back before reaching the world of the living. However, he fails, glancing back at the last moment, causing Eurydice to be lost forever. This myth illustrates that return is not always possible; it can be bound by unattainable conditions that render it an illusion or an unreachable mirage. It reflects the idea that some things, once lost, can never be recovered.

3. Prometheus: Return as a Cycle of Suffering

Prometheus, who stole fire from the gods to give it to humanity, is punished with eternal torment, chained to a rock while an eagle devours his liver daily. In this case, return takes on a cyclical form, as the same suffering repeats every day, turning time into an inescapable loop. This symbolizes the nature of divine punishment in Greek mythology, where returning to the starting point does not mean liberation but the continuation of suffering. Here, return becomes synonymous with an inevitable fate that cannot be overcome.

4. Sisyphus and the Absurd Return

Sisyphus, condemned to roll a boulder up a hill only for it to roll back down each time he nears the top, embodies the idea of return as a meaningless, absurd act. He is trapped in an eternal cycle, as if time does not progress but endlessly repeats itself. This myth raises profound philosophical questions about the futility of human effort and the possibility of achieving a final purpose or reaching a true conclusion.

5. Return to One’s Roots and Greek Fate

Many Greek myths suggest that return is not always a personal choice but rather an inescapable fate. In the myth of Oedipus, he returns to Thebes only to discover his tragic destiny, unaware that he is fulfilling the prophecy of destruction he once tried to escape. Here, return becomes a revelation of truth, a shocking moment that forces the hero to confront himself in his most profound essence.

Return as an Existential Necessity

Ultimately, return in Greek mythology is not merely a matter of place and time; it is a journey into the human self, a path that unveils fate and embodies human suffering in its quest for understanding. Whether return is a triumph, as in The Odyssey, a loss, as in Orpheus, or a punishment, as in Prometheus and Sisyphus, it remains a symbol of the human experience in its search for truth and reconciliation with destiny. Return, then, is not merely an event but the essence of existence itself, where humans revolve in the cycle of life, seeking meaning that can only be attained through suffering and deep awareness.

Return Between Fate and Choice in Greek Thought

At the heart of Greek mythology lies the ongoing struggle between human will and inevitable fate, where return plays a pivotal role in embodying this existential tension. Does the hero return because he chooses to, or because he is compelled by higher forces? This duality is evident in many Greek myths, where return becomes a representation of the struggle between freedom and destiny.

A. Return as an Inescapable Fate

Return in Greek mythology is often not a voluntary choice but an unavoidable decree imposed by forces beyond the individual’s control. Oedipus, for example, does not realize that he is returning to Thebes to fulfill the prophecy he had fled, yet he ultimately finds himself back at the site of his inevitable destruction. This suggests that return is not merely physical but also a psychological and epistemological journey that leads the hero to confront his fate.

In the myth of Agamemnon, the king returns home after the Trojan War, only to meet his predestined doom at the hands of his wife, Clytemnestra, who seeks revenge for the sacrifice of their daughter, Iphigenia. Here, return takes the form of a closed cycle, where Agamemnon’s past actions come back to haunt him at the moment of his return. This tragedy highlights that return is not always a return to safety and stability but can be a return to the dire consequences of past deeds.

B. Return as an Attempt at Redemption

In some myths, return represents an attempt at redemption, as seen in Heracles’ descent into the underworld during one of his labors. He returns after facing the horrors of death, as if undergoing a form of rebirth. This journey into the depths and back symbolizes transformation, where the hero does not return as he was but as a new version of himself, wiser and more mature.

A similar theme is found in Theseus’ journey into the labyrinth to confront the Minotaur. He faces a terrifying ordeal and returns by following the thread given to him by Ariadne, symbolizing rebirth or emergence from oblivion into light. This idea reflects the Greek belief that return is not merely a physical act but an internal transformation that transcends simply going back to a starting point.

C. Return Between Victory and Defeat

While return can be a triumph, as in The Odyssey, it can also be a failure, as in Orpheus’ case. This duality reflects the nature of Greek mythology, which does not provide clear answers but instead poses complex existential questions. Why does Odysseus succeed in returning while Orpheus fails? Perhaps because Odysseus accepts the conditions of the journey and endures its hardships, whereas Orpheus succumbs to a moment of human weakness.

This contrast between successful and failed returns reflects the Greek worldview, where rewards are not granted easily but must be earned through long suffering and arduous trials. Return is not merely a reward; it is a privilege that the hero must prove himself worthy of.

Return and the Cyclical Nature of Time in Greek Mythology

Greek mythology envisions time as cyclical, with events and patterns repeating as if humans are destined to return to specific points in their lives, no matter how much they try to escape. This perspective is embodied in the myth of Sisyphus, where return becomes an eternal curse, as he is condemned to relive the same struggle endlessly.

This idea is also evident in The Odyssey, where return is an ongoing journey of trials, suggesting that time does not progress linearly but moves in interconnected cycles. Even when Odysseus reaches Ithaca, his journey does not truly end, as the prophet Tiresias foretells that he must embark on yet another voyage, implying that return is not a conclusion but merely another phase in an endless cycle of travel and self-discovery.

Conclusion: Return as a Reflection of Human Existence

In the end, Greek mythology shows us that return is not merely a passing event but a symbol of life, death, fate, and identity. Whether it is a victory, a tragedy, or a punishment, return always embodies the deep tension between human will and the forces of destiny. It is not just a return to a place but a journey into the self, where individuals change and never return as they once were. Greek mythology teaches us that the true return is not to where we came from but to a deeper understanding of what it means to be human—eternal travelers in an unending search for meaning.

II. Return in Greek Philosophy: Between Remembrance, Fate, and Cyclical Time

In Greek philosophy, the concept of return is closely linked to theories of change and motion. Parmenides, for instance, denies change and asserts that existence is fixed, leaving no room for return in a dynamic sense. In contrast, Heraclitus views existence as being in constant flux, where return is merely a phase in an unceasing cycle. Plato, on the other hand, examines return in the context of his theory of recollection, arguing that true knowledge is nothing but a remembering of what the soul knew before its embodiment.

The notion of return is central to Greek philosophy, intertwining with ideas of recollection, destiny, identity, and time. It is not merely a physical return to a specific place but a return to truth, to origins, or to the essence of things as they truly are. The meaning of return varies across different philosophical schools: in Pythagorean thought, it takes the form of reincarnation; in Platonism, it manifests as recollection; while in Stoicism, it emerges as an eternal recurrence of all things.

1. Return as Recollection: Plato and the Theory of Knowledge

In Platonic philosophy, return holds a crucial position through the concept of anamnesis (ἀνάμνησις – recollection). Plato posits that knowledge is not acquired through sensory experience but rather a recollection of knowledge that the soul already possessed before its incarnation. Truth resides within us, and learning is merely a process of "returning" to this forgotten truth.

In the Meno, Socrates presents the example of an uneducated slave who, through Socratic questioning, is able to deduce mathematical principles he had never learned before. This demonstrates that knowledge preexists within the soul but is obscured by forgetfulness. Here, return is not a spatial movement but an internal journey toward the essence of existence, where the intellect reestablishes its connection with eternal ideas.

In The Republic, Plato employs the allegory of the cave, where a prisoner escapes the shadows of illusion and returns to the light of truth. However, his subsequent return to the cave symbolizes the philosopher’s duty to enlighten others. Thus, for Plato, return has two dimensions: an individual return to truth and a societal return to share that truth with others.

2. Return and Reincarnation: Pythagoreanism and Eternal Fate

In Pythagorean thought, return is closely associated with the concept of reincarnation (metempsychosis – μετεμψύχωσις), wherein the soul undergoes successive rebirths in different forms. Pythagoreans believed that the soul is immortal but cycles through various lives, gradually purifying itself until it returns to its divine origin.

Pythagoras maintained that these cycles are not arbitrary but part of a harmonious cosmic order in which life repeats according to fixed laws. In this sense, return is not merely repetition but an evolutionary process toward spiritual purification. This idea bears similarities to Eastern concepts of karma and rebirth, where return is linked to ethical actions that determine the nature of the soul’s future existence.

3. Eternal Return: Stoicism and Cyclical Time

Whereas Pythagoreans saw return as a path of purification, Stoics developed a stricter notion of return through the concept of eternal recurrence (ekpyrosis – ἐκπύρωσις). According to this idea, the universe undergoes endless cycles of creation and dissolution, where everything repeats itself indefinitely.

Stoics believed that the world passes through a cosmic conflagration (ekpyrosis), after which it is reborn identically, with the same people, actions, and choices recurring in an unchanging sequence. This perspective presents a deterministic view of return, where nothing truly happens anew, but rather, everything is reenacted according to an unalterable cosmic order.

This concept raises profound philosophical questions: If everything is destined to repeat exactly as before, do we truly have free will? Or does eternal return imply that existence is merely an illusion of recurrence? Leading Stoic thinkers like Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus saw this doctrine as a call to accept life as it is and to act virtuously, knowing that everything unfolds as it must.

4. Return and Causality: Aristotle and the Motion of the Cosmos

In Aristotle’s philosophy, return is closely tied to causality and motion. He argued that everything in nature moves toward its final purpose, just as the entire cosmos moves toward the Unmoved Mover—the divine essence that remains motionless yet causes all motion.

Return here can be understood as a return to one’s true nature, where all beings strive toward their ultimate fulfillment. Just as objects are drawn toward their final causes, all existence is oriented toward a return to its original perfection. Unlike Stoic eternal recurrence, Aristotle’s perspective sees return not as an exact repetition of events but as the realization of inherent potential.

5. Return as a Struggle Between Man and Fate

In Greek philosophy and tragedy, return also embodies the tension between human agency and destiny. This is evident in Greek drama, where individuals attempt to escape their fates, only to find themselves inevitably returning to them.

In Oedipus Rex by Sophocles, Oedipus seeks to avoid the prophecy that he will kill his father and marry his mother. He flees, only to unknowingly return to his birthplace, where he unwittingly fulfills the prophecy. Here, return signifies the inescapability of fate, where one’s efforts to break free only reinforce the preordained course of events.

Similarly, in Aeschylus’ Oresteia, Orestes returns to Argos to avenge his father’s murder, but in doing so, he perpetuates a new cycle of vengeance, demonstrating that return often entails being ensnared in an inescapable chain of events.

Conclusion: Return as a Cosmic Principle

In Greek philosophy, return manifests in diverse forms, but all share a common theme: it is not simply a return to a prior state but a journey toward truth—whether the truth of existence in Plato, the truth of the soul in Pythagoreanism, or the truth of time in Stoicism.

This idea reflects the Greek view of life as a cycle, where everything ultimately returns to its origin, though not necessarily in the same way, but rather enriched by experience and knowledge. Return, in this sense, is not mere repetition but a process of revelation and self-discovery—a moment where the self confronts its destiny, the cosmos affirms its eternal order, and humanity faces the reality of its existence.

Third: Transcending Traditional Metaphysics: From Essence to Event and from Being to Becoming

Nietzsche’s concept of eternal return presents a major challenge to traditional metaphysics. His idea rejects linear notions of time and insists on embracing life in its entirety, with all its contradictions, without seeking a transcendent principle to justify it. Here, return becomes a concept that goes beyond idealist metaphysics, offering a more dynamic and liberated vision of existence.

The transcendence of traditional metaphysics marks one of the most significant philosophical shifts in human thought. This transition moves from the search for absolute constants to an emphasis on movement, from the pursuit of essence to a focus on transformations, and from being to becoming. While traditional metaphysics, from Plato to Hegel, aimed to uncover the hidden structure of existence through concepts such as essence, purpose, first cause, and absolute truth, modern and contemporary philosophies have sought to deconstruct these notions—or at least to reformulate them in a way that aligns with a more dynamic view of existence and knowledge.

1. The Critique of Metaphysics in Modern Philosophy: Descartes, Kant, and the End of Metaphysics as an Absolute

With Descartes, metaphysics took a new turn, centering on the thinking self as the foundation of knowledge. However, he remained committed to the notion of substance (the substance of thought vs. the substance of extension), ultimately keeping him within the framework of traditional metaphysics.

Kant, on the other hand, created a rupture with this metaphysical tradition by asserting that the human mind cannot access being-in-itself (Ding an sich). Instead, knowledge is shaped by a priori categories that structure human experience of the world. Thus, metaphysics became an analysis of the conditions of knowledge rather than a revelation of absolute truth beyond human experience.

Despite this shift, metaphysics did not entirely disappear; rather, it was reformulated. Instead of concerning itself with an independent reality beyond thought, it became an inquiry into the structure of reason itself. In this sense, Kant did not completely overcome metaphysics but instead restructured it within the boundaries of human cognition.

2. Nietzsche’s Overcoming of Metaphysics: Will to Power and the Death of the Absolute

With Nietzsche, metaphysics undergoes a radical transformation. The question of absolute truth loses its significance, replaced by an inquiry into power, life, and interpretation. Nietzsche argues that Western philosophy, since Plato, has been preoccupied with illusory ideal worlds—such as the world of Forms, absolute truth, God, and pure reason—ultimately leading to a denial of the real, dynamic nature of life.

In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche proclaims the "death of God," a symbolic declaration marking the collapse of all absolute foundations upon which traditional metaphysics had built its worldview. Instead of absolute truth, Nietzsche introduces the concept of the "will to power," suggesting that truth is not a fixed entity but rather the result of competing forces and interpretations.

In this context, returning to the self is no longer about seeking a fixed essence but about engaging in the process of becoming—where no final truth exists, only an ongoing will to reevaluate and recreate.

3. Heidegger and the Deconstruction of Metaphysics: From Being to Time

Heidegger is one of the most influential thinkers in the effort to transcend traditional metaphysics. Unlike Nietzsche, who rejected metaphysics outright, Heidegger sought to return to a fundamental question that Western philosophy had overlooked: What is the meaning of Being?

Heidegger argues that traditional metaphysics, since Plato, has reduced Being to mere entities, assuming that behind everything there is a fixed “essence.” He rejects this notion and asserts that Being is not a static thing but rather an openness, a temporal process, and a becoming.

In Being and Time, Heidegger explains that human existence (Dasein) is not defined by a fixed essence but by its openness to possibilities. Human life is a constant tension between the past and the future—between returning to the self and projecting toward new potentialities. In this sense, return is not a movement toward a static essence but an ongoing exploration of what one can become.

4. Derrida and the Deconstruction of Metaphysics: Difference and Deferral

Jacques Derrida takes an even more radical approach to transcending metaphysics. He argues that all Western philosophy is built upon the "metaphysics of presence"—the assumption that meaning, truth, or essence is something stable and accessible. However, Derrida shows that language itself does not allow for such stability, as meaning is always deferred and shifts according to context—what he calls différance.

For Derrida, returning to the self or to truth is impossible because meaning does not reside in any fixed point; it is constantly postponed and shaped through linguistic relations. Thus, overcoming metaphysics does not mean replacing it with a new system but rather remaining aware that no ultimate center of truth exists.

5. Deleuze and the Dialectic of Becoming: From Return to Creative Repetition

For Gilles Deleuze, the transcendence of metaphysics takes a more dynamic form. Return is not simply a repetition of what was but a continuous process of recreation and transformation. In Difference and Repetition, Deleuze rejects the traditional notion of identity, arguing that every repetition is, in its essence, a difference. In other words, return does not mean going back to something familiar but rather generating something new each time.

In Deleuze’s philosophy, becoming itself is the only reality. There is no fixed essence, only flows of difference and perpetual transformations. This means that return is not about reaching an "origin" but about participating in an endless movement of reconfiguration and change.

Conclusion: From Metaphysics to Its Beyond

Transcending traditional metaphysics does not mean abandoning profound inquiries into existence; rather, it means rearticulating them in ways that move beyond conventional dichotomies—such as essence vs. appearance, permanence vs. change, and presence vs. absence.

While classical and modern philosophy sought to establish stable foundations for existence, contemporary thought aims to liberate philosophy from these fixations, rethinking existence as a continuous flow of becoming, difference, and multiplicity. Thus, return is no longer about moving back to a fixed point but is instead an ongoing creative act, where thought perpetually reinvents itself without settling on any final certainty.

Fourth: Return and the Opening of the Greatest Question of Being

The question of return leads us to a deeper contemplation of the nature of being itself. Is existence linear or circular? Is change inevitable, or is there an underlying permanence behind shifting phenomena? These questions, first posed by the Greek philosophers, continue to inspire contemporary philosophical thought, demonstrating that return is not merely a temporal notion but a fundamental issue in understanding humanity and the world.

The concept of "return" is not merely a movement in space or a restoration of what was; rather, it is a philosophical act that reopens the greatest question of being: What is existence? And how do we comprehend it in relation to time, the self, the absolute, and becoming?

The question of being was the first question of philosophy, yet it has always remained an open question. Every attempt to answer it gives rise to new inquiries. In this sense, return is not merely a recollection of what has been said but a re-articulation of the fundamental question from a new perspective and within a different horizon. It is not a retreat to a starting point but an opening to possibilities that were previously unavailable.

1. Return as the Resumption of the First Question

When Parmenides asked, "Being is, and non-being cannot be," he laid the foundation for all subsequent thought on existence. However, from that moment onward, philosophy has struggled to understand the nature of this "being"—is it fixed or changing? Is it one or many? Is it an entity independent of our consciousness, or merely a structure within our perception?

Returning to this question does not mean posing it in its original form but engaging with it through the transformations that philosophical thought has undergone. After Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida, the question "What is being?" can no longer be answered in a traditional metaphysical manner. Instead, it has become entangled with language, becoming, time, and interpretative practices.

2. Return to the Self: Is There an Essential Core to Existence?

In traditional philosophy, return was often viewed as a return to a fixed origin—whether it be God, nature, reason, or the true self. However, with the deconstruction of metaphysics, the question arises: Is there a "self" or an "essence" to which one can return, or is existence itself nothing more than a flow of differences and transformations?

For Nietzsche, there is no hidden "truth" behind the world—only multiple, competing interpretations. For Heidegger, being can only be understood within human temporal experience, that is, within "openness to possibilities." For Deleuze, existence is not an essence but an endless series of repetitions that generate difference anew each time.

Thus, return is not a search for a fixed starting point but an ongoing exploration where each return signifies an opening to new possibilities of being.

3. Return Between Linear Time and Cyclical Time

One of the most significant issues raised by the concept of return is the relationship between time and existence. If time is linear, as modern thought often assumes, then return is impossible, as each moment is unique and cannot be retrieved. If, however, time is cyclical, as in Stoic thought or Nietzsche’s idea of "eternal recurrence," then everything returns as it once was, making existence itself deterministic and infinitely repetitive.

Yet, contemporary philosophies introduce a new conception of time—one that is neither linear nor circular but rather an interwoven and interpenetrating structure of past, present, and future. Time is no longer merely a framework for existence but becomes part of its very nature.

In this context, return becomes an "event"—not a restoration of the past, but the creation of a point where past and future intersect. Thus, returning to the question of being is not about reviving old ideas but rethinking them within the present, from the horizon of possible futures.

4. Is Return Possible, or Is It Merely an Illusion?

If existence itself is in a state of constant becoming, can there truly be a "return"? Or is every attempt at return, in reality, a movement forward?

On the personal level, return implies self-retrieval—an attempt to understand individual identity over time. But if the self itself is constantly changing, can one ever truly return to "what one was"? Or is every return actually a recreation of the self in a new context?

On the philosophical level, return means re-engaging with fundamental questions. However, this is not a return to old answers but rather a reconfiguration of the question itself in light of new intellectual and existential transformations.

5. Return as an Opening to the Infinite

If philosophy aims to contemplate being, then return is not merely a search for an origin or a lost truth; rather, it is a movement toward the infinite, where there is no final point of knowledge—only a continuous unfolding of questions.

Philosophical thought is not a journey toward a definitive answer but a perpetual return to the very act of questioning, where every answer gives rise to new inquiries. In this sense, return is not an endpoint but always a new beginning.

Conclusion: Return as an Unending Question

Returning to the greatest question of being does not mean seeking a final certainty; rather, it means recognizing that this question will always remain open. It is not a retreat into the past but a progression toward a new horizon, where every act of thought is a return to itself—but from a different perspective.

Thus, return becomes the very essence of philosophy: an unceasing inquiry into being, time, truth, and the yet-to-be-discovered possibilities of existence.

Conclusion

The concept of return in Greek philosophy represents a point of convergence between myth and metaphysical thought. In later philosophies, it transforms into a tool for transcending traditional metaphysics and re-examining the nature of time and existence. Through analyzing return, we open the door to the greatest question of being—a question that remains unresolved and continues to spark debate in philosophical thought to this day.

In Greek philosophy, return embodied ideas such as cyclical time, the search for origins, and eternal recurrence. However, it did not remain static; rather, it evolved into a means of reconsidering the nature of time and existence. In some modern philosophies, it became a way to move beyond traditional metaphysics, which sought to establish fixed and absolute truths. In this context, return is no longer merely a restoration of what was; it becomes a philosophical act that reopens fundamental questions from new perspectives, shifting the search for truth from an endeavor to attain final certainty into an ongoing dialogue between past and future, presence and absence, permanence and change.

In this sense, return is not the recovery of a fixed starting point but a dynamic movement that reflects the nature of philosophical thought itself—one that never settles on final answers but continuously reshapes its questions according to different historical and epistemological contexts. From Parmenides' initial inquiry into being to Nietzsche and Derrida’s deconstruction of metaphysics, and from Plato’s vision of return as a recollection of truth to Heidegger’s understanding of it as an openness to future possibilities, the greatest question of being has persisted, manifesting in different forms throughout the evolution of philosophy.

In modern and contemporary philosophies, return is no longer simply a search for a fixed origin; rather, it has become an interpretative act that allows for plurality in understanding and experience. It is no longer a mere repetition but an open horizon for renewal and transformation. It departs from the classical notion of a closed temporal cycle and instead becomes an ongoing process of rethinking meaning. The question of "What is being?" is no longer an attempt to grasp a stable essence but an ever-expanding exploration of what existence could be, shaped by the possibilities it unfolds.

Thus, analyzing return not only reveals the evolution of philosophical thought across time but also compels us to recognize that the greatest question of being is not merely a theoretical issue—it is an open-ended path. Return does not occur solely within time; it happens within thought itself, where the philosopher continually finds themselves returning to the fundamental question, yet from a new perspective each time. It is not a journey backward but an ongoing reconfiguration of meaning, where past, present, and future intertwine in an unceasing intellectual experience.

From this perspective, the question of return is not merely a historical or metaphysical inquiry; it touches the essence of philosophy itself, reflecting thought as an act of continuous critique, transcendence, and openness to unrealized possibilities. If the greatest question of being remains unresolved, it is because it is not a question meant to be resolved but an ever-expanding horizon for transformation and reflection—one that will continue to provoke debate as long as humanity seeks meaning in an ever-changing world.

ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ 

• Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. Translated by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. Harper & Row, 1962. • Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. Penguin Classics, 1978. • Derrida, Jacques. Writing and Difference. Translated by Alan Bass. University of Chicago Press, 1978. • Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repetition. Translated by Paul Patton. Columbia University Press, 1994. • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge University Press, 1998. • Plato. The Republic. Translated by Allan Bloom. Basic Books, 1991. • Aristotle. Metaphysics. Translated by Hugh Lawson-Tancred. Penguin Classics, 1998. • Parmenides. Fragments: The Way of Truth. Translated by David Gallop. University of Toronto Press, 1984. • Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller. Oxford University Press, 1977. • Ricoeur, Paul. Time and Narrative. Translated by Kathleen McLaughlin and David Pellauer. University of Chicago Press, 1984.

Add comment