News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower. Parent comment

Re:Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower by boomboomsubban on Tuesday October 05, 2021 @11:25PM (#28768822)
The use of "God" in that statement refers to an objective source. While I'm not a fan of the phrase, it clearly means an absolute truth. No bibles necessary.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower by adolph on Wednesday October 06, 2021 @09:42PM (#28780788)
> The use of "God" in that statement refers to an objective source.

Do tell.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower by boomboomsubban on Wednesday October 06, 2021 @11:08PM (#28781394)
Like I said, it means a supposed absolute truth. As there is no objective source, you can use a term for what would be an objective source, "god."
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower by adolph on Thursday October 07, 2021 @01:17AM (#28782328)
"[A] supposed absolute truth" Is that like a redundancy (absolute and truth) wrapped in a contradiction (supposed and absolute truth)?

If there is no such thing (i.e. no objective source) why would one use any term for it?

Why would one modify truth to be "god's own?" Is it a rhetorical claim to the authority/authenticity of an unseen third party?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower by boomboomsubban on Thursday October 07, 2021 @02:42AM (#28782992)
It's a cutesy way of saying the actual truth. Language is full of such ridiculous contradictions used to express things, I wouldn't use this one but I don't see how it is particularly objectionable.
[ Parent | on HN ]