gaktattack
Bluelighter
"Change is the only constant". What about the truth-value of that proposition itself? If it is subject to change, then it will at some time become false. If the truth-value is constant, then we ought to say that "Change (and the truth value of this proposition) are the only constants". Of course, then we have to go one level higher to preserve our truth, so we inevitably generate an endless set of meta-truths, and in fact end up with an infinite number of constants. The statement has always seemed like one of those obviously self-contradictory bits of nonsense that somehow gets percieved as profound. I think this illustrates a wider trend, OP; you're reading too deeply into things that are actually pretty trivial. There are all sorts of genuinely fascinating phenomena in the world, there's no need to manufacture your own.
Can I take that as yay for coincidence?