In class, we've been discussing the ideas of truth within history, and how that "truth" is interpreted throughout the ages. Though I didn't mention it in class, I've found that personally I believe truth to be a very subjective matter, that differs from person to person, and can't be evaluated by any other individual.

Truth to a Catholic is very different from the truth of a Protestant, as history has shown. But this doesn't mean that someone has to stand up and say, Yeah, okay, but which one is right? Because within the truth of opinions and the truth of individual experience, there is no right and wrong, only being. I feel as though a lot of people in history either haven't realized this, or just choose to ignore it because it benefits them.

To be honest, it's one of those subjects that just completely bores me. Yes, I want to know the truth whenever possible, and while I wouldn't like to be lied to, I'm perfectly fine with realizing that a lot of history was written to benefit someone, such as the church, or the king, or other important people or organization.

Isn't that why everything is written, to benefit someone or something? As a whole, humans are not creatures of selflessness. Every move we make is to benefit or comfort or satisfy our selves and our desires in some way, and I see no reason why literature would be any different. And sure, it can be argued that this is "right" or "wrong", but I'd rather not waste my time.