Oh wait...motion already corrupted that creation.
Maybe this isn't the best way of looking at the situation. It's unreasonable to expect a statement about a state of affairs to remain objectively and exhaustively true for all time, in all circumstances. It's at least equally unreasonable to put such faith in language's capacity to represent reality truly to such an extent. To call that corruption though is quite a bit too far. Most statements, at the time of their utterance, occur within a context wherein the transitory nature of states of affairs is well understood. I can say my "brother is in town", now, and its recipient will not reasonably assume that will necessarily continue to be the case a week from now.
Corruption is too strong of a word for it; it has a certain similarity with corruption, in that the relative "usefulness" of a statement can be said to "decay" with time.
(post is archived)