Identity of truth - Is it absolute or relative?

Finally I was able to persuade Gautam, who is a very good friend of mine to be a guest blogger in my site. Please do go through his interesting blog below and let me know what you think. You guys can also ask Gautam question on his thoughts....



The question of identity of truth...is it Absolute or Relative.

This is a question that always haunts me and the answer keeps on
changing over time.

The world throws out ambiguous answers to support/disagree with both
ideas. For example, taking the case of most scientific breakthroughs
(viz., the Newton's laws of motion), we find that most of them are based
on the perception of the inventor and their accuracy/validity is not
absolute. In spite of their being incomplete, they are 'enabling' for
the mankind.

Human beings, by nature, are fleeting in their conduct and their
physical being i.e., nothing can be said to be the absolute truth about
their being, yet their lives inspire the musicians to compose great
music and the novelists to write great novels. Isn't it only the
relative picture that an artist grasps and which inspires him/her to
give shape to something that is absolute and timeless?
So, what kind of truth should one seek? One which is ephemeral or one
which is eternal? Thus, should we only restrict truth's definition to
those set of events and consequences whose relationship is timeless and
unbounded physically or, include the opposite kinds as well? Where does
life lie, ultimately?