Memory is a selection of images, some clear, others illusive, some engraved deeply within the abysmal recesses of our minds. Each image is a strand and each strand is an essential part of the tapestry of life. What makes this bitter reality of existence worth its while is the fact that we all hold a piece of the truth. It may come as a surprise to some but even the ignorant, the dumb and the broken have their stories to tell. Bitter reality never was exclusively selective and truth resides both in silence and in speech.
I have come to know in the span of nineteen years that the concept of a single and definite truth is nothing but a three-fold Utopian dream. Being that, it would be beyond the pale of my descriptive capacity for impossible to even try to hint its likelihood as my truth and my reality may not be the same for everyone else. A simple but glaring illustration is the subject of religion and its immortal controversies. A spin-off of Catholicism, the Church of Christ (Iglesia ni Cristo) denies the deity of Christ while Roman Catholics believe in the mystery that Christ is both human and divine. Each facet have their own beliefs and they both hold them to be their truths. If you were a member of the Church of Christ, it is your truth that Christ is not divine and your truth would be the opposite if you were a Roman Catholic. Whose truth therefore, is the real truth? Is it the former or the latter's? Dare I even say both? There is absolutely no sense in accepting both arguments to be the Truth obviously because the ideas are in opposition. Is it safe therefore to assume that Truth is relative?
Even science with all its observations, identifications, descriptions, experimental investigations, and theoretical explanantions of phenomena, is not immune from the multifaceted spectrum of truth. About seven thousand years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. Now, we all know that it's not true. It was true then, when man's model of the universe was geocentric in nature as proposed by Aristotle an Ptolemy but the case isn't presently so. When Copernicus came up with his heliocentric hypothesis, the masses rejected its veracity because if first of all did not fit into the Aristotelian way of thinking and it also challenged the long-standing belief that the earth was the heavenly center of the universe placed by god himself.
So my contention is, anyone can change the truth, with doubt, with blood, with death, with an intense struggle or by whatever means anyone sees fit to galvanize its evolution because the reality of truth is that it is not only relative, it is also flexible (now we know why there are so many spindoctors in the world) and usually redefined to suit one's necessity. There must be honesty therefore, in the statement that the only thing constant in this world is change... and that statement includes Truth within its scope.
What therefore really matters you might ask... well, at this point, there is no justice in saying that the Truth matters. What matters is your own truth, or more accurately put, your own version of the truth as you see and experience it to be. What matters is the veracity of your truth. What is important is the strenght of your conviction in your truth that it helps other people find their truth as well.