For many objects we have the (wrong) intuition, based on our experience, that they are "eternal". As an example, for our purposes, Planets, maybe monuments, ... looks like ever lasting bodies. Necessarily, we also construct mental ideals that are eternal because they are abstract: the idea of an apple will never go bad.

However, are there known paradoxes arising from bodies that never change or that last forever? Or has this philosophical thought ever been developed somewhere?

Thank you for opinions and suggestions!

  • Physical bodies: even the elementary particles that make up physical objects may decay/vanish one day. Mental ideas: as long as there's a mind (not necessarily a physical one), mental ideas are eternal.
    – user935
    Commented Jan 23, 2018 at 16:13
  • 3
    nothing in this sensual universe is eternal, including thoughts. Everything is subject to decay and destruction. Thoughts are part of the sensual universe. Everything that is a combination is always changing. How can something that has a beginning be called eternal? How can it be eternal? Eternal means without beginning or end....how can something that has a beginning never have an end? It is not logical. Commented Jan 24, 2018 at 4:35
  • Consider also that no object stays the same even for one second. Objects are evanescent. Not only can we not step into the same river twice but we can't even see the same object twice. There are,many paradoxes associated with the idea of unchanging objects because the idea ignores the relative nature of objects and their reliance on other objects (and subjects) for their identity. . . .
    – user20253
    Commented Jan 30, 2018 at 12:58
  • @PeterJ your comment is very interesting and relevant. If you do not mind, whenever you have time could you please elaborate on that, or suggest me some references? Thanks a lot!
    – m137
    Commented Jan 31, 2018 at 13:38
  • 1
    m137 - Sure thing. The idea that objects do not persist in time is associated with philosophies that deny the true reality of time and space. The Perennial philosophy is one such, so most of the discussion of this is found in the 'Wisdom' literature, Unfortunately I don't have a handy reference but Nagarjuna would be worth investigating. His view, which is orthodox in this other philosophical tradition, would be that by reduction nothing really exists or ever happens. So much for objects. You could try googling 'Buddhism' and 'evanescence' and that might work. . .
    – user20253
    Commented Feb 1, 2018 at 10:42

1 Answer 1



the mundane world is never eternal. there is, however, a trade off between its observed latent decay and generation.

Nevertheless, we can search for the material work of the eternity and find out Who is the real cause of the existences, material and spiritual.

our philosophical theories are conceptualized within the limits of space and time relation. we can never do the analysis beyond the logic (based on analogies and memorizing).

The material life (existence) is cyclic, however, the spiritual existence is beyond any time frame of observation. The material existence is a work of the spiritual cause. the spiritual cause has no direct relationship with the material cause and the supreme spiritual cause is the cause of all the causes, in material and within spiritual existence.

"teshaam satat yuktanaam bhajtaam pritipurvakam, dadaami budhhiyogam tam yen maam upayanti te."

since, every work has its cause. the material logic to understand something which is beyond time domain is also beyond understanding the cause of the work. so, seems illogical !

  • Hi, welcome to Philosophy SE. We ask that posts be supported by references rather than simply describe personal opinions of the poster. Please indicate whose views your description reflects.
    – Conifold
    Commented Jan 30, 2018 at 4:07
  • the above is excerpted from the Bhagvat Gita. Chapter #10 and 11.
    – user30612
    Commented Jan 30, 2018 at 5:42
  • I assume you mean the transliterated Sanskrit phrase (English translation would be nice). Is the rest your own exposition of Bhagavad Gita or a retelling of some commentary which can also be referenced?
    – Conifold
    Commented Jan 30, 2018 at 6:43
  • I can say that this almost certainly not original work, I have heard it detailed elsewhere. Unrelated, how does one provide a reference for thought that is only communicated through spoken word? Actually, I remember seeing an example of that on Big Encyclopedia Site.
    – Willtech
    Commented Mar 31, 2018 at 8:55
  • yes. " we can search for the material work of the eternity....."
    – user30612
    Commented May 2, 2018 at 9:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .