APRIL 12, 2026 · 6 MIN READ

Plato and Domain Driven Design

A small translation note that reveals a distinction being and becoming and how it relates to domain driven design.

The quote in question is from Timaeus, which is often used to describe Plato’s Forms and particulars or Being and Becoming.:

“What is that which always is and has no becoming; and what is that which is always becoming and never is?”.

The correct translation should read:

“What is that which always is (in the same state) and has no becoming (and perishing), and what is that which is always becoming (and perishing) but (and) never is (in the same state)

You could see this is correct translation because in the very next sentence he elaborates:

That which is apprehended by intelligence and reason is always in the same state; but that which is conceived by opinion with the help of sensation and without reason, is always in a process of becoming and perishing and never really is.

He also repeats this distinction in several other books, but with different wordings.

Exact distinction exists in software modeling as Value objects vs Entities objects in Domain Driven Design.

Where Entities:

Value objects:

τί τὸ ὂν ἀεί, γένεσιν δὲ οὐκ ἔχον, καὶ τί τὸ γιγνόμενον μὲν ἀεί, ὂν δὲ οὐδέποτε; 27d

τὸ μὲν δὴ νοήσει μετὰ λόγου περιληπτόν, ἀεὶ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ὄν, τὸ δ᾽ αὖ δόξῃ μετ᾽ αἰσθήσεως ἀλόγου δοξαστόν, γιγνόμενον καὶ ἀπολλύμενον, ὄντως δὲ οὐδέποτε ὄν. 28a

What this tells me is how loaded are the terms Being and Becoming in philosophy. From section above you could see they are just a shorthand for “being in the same state” and “becoming and perishing”.

Comments

Join the discussion on GitHub.