What disturbs me a bit is that we’re in an atheism community and 99% of the answers hinge around ‘put up more religion’. Sure, if one then treat them all the same. But then also treat us the same. We don’t believe that any of that has a room in a science class room. Where is the respect for our believe?
Hang them up. Then once explain to your students why none of this belongs in a science class room. Ask who would like to have the honors of tearing them down at the end of the class as a proactive lesson on science. Explain to them why this will be a daily ritual now.
This way they’re on display every day, so you are strictly speaking compliant. But it makes it very clear that this has no place here. Your students will become more comfortable with the idea of resisting religious BS. Until the day you are fired for it. Then they learn that freedom has a price.
atheism isn’t a belief system though. it’s the absence of belief. if the teachers are forced to do stuff based on belief, the only malicious compliance that works within the rules is to treat all belief systems equally. science is also not a belief system.
Idk man. I’m pretty sure atheism technically IS a belief system: the null set is a subset of every set (also sure, bald is a hair color and if you hold up 2 fists I can count zero fingers you’re holding up). Of course, this is subject to some rich debate.
I suspect you can go a step further in malicious compliance by maximally broadening what you mean by “belief system”. Obviously you should also have Asimovs 3 laws of robotics, the first rule of fight club, the key phrase to view the marauders map, and so on.
Atheism is the lack of that belief. You can be an atheist and simply lack belief, or you can affirmatively claim that no gods exist.
Many atheists are somewhat in the middle: for example, there are certain god claims that are so patently ridiculous (e.g. Xenu) that I do claim that they don’t exist, whereas there are others that are probably unfalsifiable (e.g. a deistic god) and so I don’t think it’s possible to make a legitimate claim that they don’t exist.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge, not belief. It’s right there in the word: “gnostos” is the Greek word for knowledge.
this is a problem the movement has had forever. people who call themselves atheist but specifically “do not believe in God”, with the name capitalised, ruin it for the rest of us.
agnosticism is specifically a both-sides belief. actual modern atheism is about theory of work. people who grow up christian and then turn against their upbringing think they’re atheist but they’re actually “achristian”.
I understand where you’re coming from and I probably wouldn’t have worded things in the same way the person you’re replying to is, but there are a lot of misconceptions out there around what atheism is. For example I’ve talked to people who exit Christianity and simultaneously call themselves atheists while developing a belief in a different god, and this is objectively not atheism. Similarly, there’s often an atheism vs. agnosticism confusion which I addressed in a different comment here.
The idea isn’t to spread religious dogma, the idea is to put up non-christian, non-secular sources of what most would consider to be wisdom and watch the hypocrites who made the stupid law in the first place lose their minds that teachers are “putting [Islam, Buddhism, Satanism, etc] in schools”. of course, to prevent the teacher from doing that, they would have to sue and potentially have the law that requires teachers to post up the 10 commandments in the first place be declared unconstitutional in order to also remove other sources of religious references.
What disturbs me a bit is that we’re in an atheism community and 99% of the answers hinge around ‘put up more religion’. Sure, if one then treat them all the same. But then also treat us the same. We don’t believe that any of that has a room in a science class room. Where is the respect for our believe?
Hang them up. Then once explain to your students why none of this belongs in a science class room. Ask who would like to have the honors of tearing them down at the end of the class as a proactive lesson on science. Explain to them why this will be a daily ritual now.
This way they’re on display every day, so you are strictly speaking compliant. But it makes it very clear that this has no place here. Your students will become more comfortable with the idea of resisting religious BS. Until the day you are fired for it. Then they learn that freedom has a price.
atheism isn’t a belief system though. it’s the absence of belief. if the teachers are forced to do stuff based on belief, the only malicious compliance that works within the rules is to treat all belief systems equally. science is also not a belief system.
Idk man. I’m pretty sure atheism technically IS a belief system: the null set is a subset of every set (also sure, bald is a hair color and if you hold up 2 fists I can count zero fingers you’re holding up). Of course, this is subject to some rich debate.
I suspect you can go a step further in malicious compliance by maximally broadening what you mean by “belief system”. Obviously you should also have Asimovs 3 laws of robotics, the first rule of fight club, the key phrase to view the marauders map, and so on.
hello mr peterson
I disagree.
Agnosticism is the absence of belief.
Atheism is believing that there is no God.
Theism is the belief in a god or gods.
Atheism is the lack of that belief. You can be an atheist and simply lack belief, or you can affirmatively claim that no gods exist.
Many atheists are somewhat in the middle: for example, there are certain god claims that are so patently ridiculous (e.g. Xenu) that I do claim that they don’t exist, whereas there are others that are probably unfalsifiable (e.g. a deistic god) and so I don’t think it’s possible to make a legitimate claim that they don’t exist.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge, not belief. It’s right there in the word: “gnostos” is the Greek word for knowledge.
deleted by creator
this is a problem the movement has had forever. people who call themselves atheist but specifically “do not believe in God”, with the name capitalised, ruin it for the rest of us.
agnosticism is specifically a both-sides belief. actual modern atheism is about theory of work. people who grow up christian and then turn against their upbringing think they’re atheist but they’re actually “achristian”.
Nothing like gatekeeping something as basic as not believing in myths.
I understand where you’re coming from and I probably wouldn’t have worded things in the same way the person you’re replying to is, but there are a lot of misconceptions out there around what atheism is. For example I’ve talked to people who exit Christianity and simultaneously call themselves atheists while developing a belief in a different god, and this is objectively not atheism. Similarly, there’s often an atheism vs. agnosticism confusion which I addressed in a different comment here.
I always think, there’s atheists and there’s angry atheists
But yes achristian works.
The idea isn’t to spread religious dogma, the idea is to put up non-christian, non-secular sources of what most would consider to be wisdom and watch the hypocrites who made the stupid law in the first place lose their minds that teachers are “putting [Islam, Buddhism, Satanism, etc] in schools”. of course, to prevent the teacher from doing that, they would have to sue and potentially have the law that requires teachers to post up the 10 commandments in the first place be declared unconstitutional in order to also remove other sources of religious references.
Cheers, your viewpoint is much appreciated and enabled me to see a new facette to the discussion!