Comments for Atheists, Agnostics, and Freethinkers of Waterloo

Comment on Epistemological Considerations by The Proverbist (@proverbist)

The Proverbist (@proverbist) — Thu, 09 May 2013 22:47:29 +0000

Good! Glad to see someone else concerned with epistemology. Though, my terminology has more been concerned with structuralism and post-structuralism which fundamentally deal with the same ideas. The problem with positivism is that its own definition is unsound. It claims that knowledge in only valid through sensory perception of data. But its definition is a philosophical posit that cannot be proved with data. That, and it under-regards the process of interpreting data (which is often the crux of knowledge [how one interprets {epistemology}]). Structuralism is the same. It tries to create structures for the universe to abide by. Which, is possible to a degree. But structuralism has too much faith in systems, generalizing and categorizing, which can hinder research, because the interpretive lens is given authoritatively as a standard of perception.
To me, post-positivism is more attractive, because it practically assumes the same method of research, but always taints it with a degree of skepticism so to leave to door open, and awaiting valuable criticism or affirmation. Post-structuralism is similar in the sense that it encourages a position of understanding systems as practical and useful, but ultimately man created and potentially misrepresenting or limiting perceived reality. It looks at charts and systems as portraits that may need to continually evolve into a better model/visual-metaphor of reality. It is less about what we know, and more about what we think we know (which I think is a more rigorous method of assessment which still renders progressive perception and technology).
I posit that philosophical adoption of either of these two theories can be reflected on one’s associated stance. I bet if you interviewed atheists and agnostics, most atheists would assume positivism/structuralism as a better methodology, and most agnostics would assume the position of post-theory (because we are skeptics).

Comment on Time for These Catholics to Accept That Their “Morals” Need Changing (Anti-Bullying Bill in Ontario) by Valerie Jaspers-Fayer

Valerie Jaspers-Fayer — Tue, 07 May 2013 23:40:39 +0000

It is time to move to One public school system In Ontario.

The Catholic school system should realize that it has sold its soul, for a place at the public tax- funded trough, and let go. Then by rights…it may better fulfill its own ethical principals and teaching its own values. Teaching values comes with an ethical price tag….the Roman Catholic system needs to leave the public trough and become more like the other private religious schools in the province which also teach the Ontario Curriculum but which are parent funded…not publicly funded by the province.

Religion in schools is something parents should fund personally, based on their religious understandings and ability to form private schools. As declared at the United Nations, no one religion in Ontario should have preference, in a public school system in Ontario.

Comment on Women, Atheist Conferences, and You Know Where This is Going by best online poker sites for real money

best online poker sites for real money — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:53:16 +0000

As the admin of this site is working, no uncertainty very shortly it will be renowned, due to its feature contents.

Comment on Should all speech be free? by Chris

Chris — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 17:31:51 +0000

I think most people who argue for free speech are mostly arguing for the freedom to offend, instead of “trolling” or all the other examples you gave. I disagree that a school should limit any student’s speech and I think most atheists would agree with me. Everyone should feel free to express their belief, just like we have the right to ridicule such beliefs, especially those of a creationist in a biology class.
Defending neo-nazis and holocaust deniers’ freedom of speech does not mean one is “defending racists”. The argument comes down to whether you are able to discern and ignore hateful speech or if you need some one to do it for you. Who would you appoint to be the person who can limit someone’s speech?
You ignore the possibility that if most of us “agree that the speech causes more harm than good”, the expression of unpopular ideas can be silenced and cause a tyranny of the majority against ideological minorities.

Comment on Hello, Death! by Live everyday like you are Dying | The BitterSweet End

Live everyday like you are Dying | The BitterSweet End — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:22:59 +0000

[...] Hello Death [...]

Comment on 2012 in review by Lena

Lena — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 04:15:37 +0000

Hi, I believe your blog might be having browser compatibility problems.
When I take a look at your blog in Safari, it looks fine
but when opening in IE, it’s got some overlapping issues. I simply wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Other than that, excellent website! Lena

Comment on Weird weather. Soon to be normal weather by Weather Extremes Provoked by Trapping of Giant Waves in the Atmosphere | Family Survival Protocol

Tue, 26 Feb 2013 02:13:38 +0000

[...] Weird weather. Soon to be normal weather (aafwaterloo.wordpress.com) [...]

Comment on No one is being purged by winghamatheist

winghamatheist — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:48:17 +0000

I didn’t know that, but that’s awesome! The group has been active for about 5 – 6 years now. There was another atheist group before then though I don’t know much about its history.

Comment on No one is being purged by Crommunist

Crommunist — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 03:59:05 +0000

Found this post by trackback. Not sure if you knew this, but I am a UW alum. Glad to see an active group there!

Comment on Sam Harris Really Needs to Stop by Jenin Younes

Jenin Younes — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:59:49 +0000

Thank you for this thoughtful post. I am an atheist, and also the daughter of a Palestinian. For some time, I was a fan of Sam Harris, but as I grew a bit older and wiser realized how simplistic his critiques of Islam and the Muslim world are, for the reasons you discussed. His comments on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict particularly disillusioned me, when I realized he was willing to speak with authority on a subject he clearly knows nothing about, and to ignore the suffering of Palestinians over the last sixty years.