Do you believe in god?

[yanong_banikanhon]

---

Bay hitch22, wa lagi nimo tubaga ang akong pangutana.

What is THE ULTIMATE arbiter of ALL truths? Is it science itself?

[hitch22]

^^ So kay dili man diay the ultimate arbiter of all truths ang scientific method, ang pangutana mao: What is the ultimate arbiter of all truths ? Is it science itself?

FINALLY, KASABOT NA GYUD. I HOPE, kay ga-duda pa man ko ani niya ba.

Ayaw lagi nang style nimo na pili-on lang ang usa ka sentence, usbon pa gyud ang wording, unya tang-tangon ang uban parts sa message. That's because it's the entire message that makes the point. Otherwise, you're just putting words in my mouth. Ako bitaw, I take the time to read the entire post and let it sink in my mind before I respond, because I respect the other guy's views (including yours) and I'm sincere in my exchange. When you isolate one sentence, like what you did...UNYA DILI PA GYUD ANG EXACT WORDING ANG I-QUOTE (which is tantamount to bearing FALSE WITNESS), you're intention is not to engage in a sincere discussion but merely to bother people unnecessarily. And that is juvenile.

May I ask: How old are you, by the way? I mean, your real age, if you don't mind me asking.

[yanong_banikanhon]

^^ Bay hitch22, ayaw usab-usaba ang focus. Aron dili magduda ang mga tawo sa imong tumong. Abi na lang dili ka katubag maong naglikay-likay ka sa question.

Please answer my question:

What is THE ULTIMATE arbiter of ALL truths? Is it science itself?

[hitch22]

It turned out later that the student is Albert Einstein.''

Really, I've read this anecdote several times already. I'm only using the last part of your comment to respond very briefly. This conversation between a young Einstein and his professor is said to have purportedly transpired. There's even a Youtube video of this.

Sad to prick this balloon. This is a well-known URBAN MYTH. I've read both Isaacson's and Hermann's accounts of Einstein's biography. There's no mention of that conversation having taken place.

You want to know what Einstein thought about Christianity?

But what makes me shudder is that the Catholic Church is silent. One doesn't need to be a prophet to say, 'The Catholic Church will pay for this silence...I do not say that the unspeakable crimes of the Church for 2,000 years had always the blessing of the Vatican, but it vaccinated its believers with the idea: We have the true God, and the Jews have crucified Him.' The Church sowed hate instead of love, though the ten commandments state: Thou shalt not kill.

Although his statement was about the Catholic Church, he really is speaking against the collective guilt imposed upon the Jews by Christianity: THAT THE JEWS KILLED CHRIST and therefore generations of Jews have to pay the price.

[Norad-II]

It turned out later that the student is Albert Einstein.''

This is patently false, and honestly insulting to Albert Einstein.

snopes.com: Einstein Humiliates Atheist

EDIT: Dang, hitch22 beat me to it. Shame on my slow hands.

[yanong_banikanhon]

Hitch22, here is my question again:

What is THE ULTIMATE arbiter of ALL truths? Is it science itself?

Lisud diay na tubagon, bay?

[hash]

i only have one GOD

..andi dont believe in people having diff religion. pfft!

[yanong_banikanhon]

hitch22, hilom pa man lagi ka sa silent night. Asa ra man tong nag-awas2x nimo nga confidence ganina? Dili man ka motuo og GOD di ba? So akong balikon ang akong question:

What is THE ULTIMATE arbiter of ALL truths? Is it science itself?

[chuckkcuhc]

yes

tou jud ta god oiii

sabay sa uso ba

[hitch22]

^^ Bay hitch22, ayaw usab-usaba ang focus. Aron dili magduda ang mga tawo sa imong tumong. Abi na lang dili ka katubag maong naglikay-likay ka sa question.

Please answer my question:

What is THE ULTIMATE arbiter of ALL truths? Is it science itself?

Well, because you've misquoted me and quoted me out of context, I have every right to be suspicious of your intentions. You LIED. WHAT ELSE CAN I SAY?

You want me to answer your question. Fair enough. Let's deal with it then. I'll start with the second question first, since that's easier. Is it science itself? Well, the domain of science is the natural world. As far as things that are observable in nature are concerned, the scientific method has been the ultimate arbiter of what's right and what's wrong amongst competing theories/hypothesis. When I say "ultimate," I mean it has the final say on which theories survive and which theories get set aside. And when I say "final say," that only means that the scientific method has deemed a theory fully supported. It's just like a judge in the court of law who is the ultimate arbiter of what's acceptable evidence, testimonies, etc., as far as the domain of litigation is concerned.

Now, as you phrased the question: what is the ultimate arbiter of all truths? This is not a valid question. Why? A truth needs no arbiter; it is a settled matter. Get it? This is the problem when you take things out of context and twist words, as if trying to be smart. You get the whole thing wrong. The proper way to phrase this question is a very localized one. It goes like this, as how I stated it. We have competing explanations. What is the ultimate arbiter for the truth or falsity of these explanations?

Perhaps, you intended the question to be phrased like this: WHAT IS THE ULTIMATE ARBITER FOR THE TRUTH OR FALSITY OF EVERYTHING?

Well, that begs the question, doesn't it? The domain of everything is so wide. The question has to go back to you: Can you list the domains that is captured in "EVERYTHING"?