Your People Know Their Jobs

I was rewatching Star Trek: The Motion Picture since they re-released it with upgrades on Paramount+.  Such a great movie.  One scene stuck out to me particularly.  The Enterprise has gone through a refit and Kirk has taken command away from its present captain.  Kirk is in a rush to get the ship out and wants to head to Warp speed.  Scotty and the former captain advise against it - more tests need to be run.  Kirk insists that they move forward on his command nevertheless.

Bones, ever the wise adviser, leans in and says quietly to Kirk, "Jim... you're pushing... your people know their jobs."

This reminds me of the state of American education.  There are few places in public education where people are trusted to "know their jobs."

I have it fairly easy.  I get a decent amount of control over my job.  The Utah legislature is forever overstepping, but we have a fair amount of local control.  The parents in my building are supportive.

I know that is not how it is around a lot of the country though.  I can't imagine what it is like in areas where the Q-Anon crowd is the norm.  Reading about the parents and legislatures in these areas, no wonder teachers are abandoning ship.  What would it be like to teach in an area where every legislator and parent is a Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz wannabe?

Viewing God Properly

This is a response I gave to a friend on a Facebook thread when he challenged the notion someone of even being an atheist.  He shared an article that stated that atheists fail when they simply reject the vision of God they have contrived and are not open to other visions of God. When folks on the thread did not want to engage in that line of reasoning, the response was "As usual, atheists have no answers when questioned."

I get some version of that rather often, typically from liberal believers.  Anyway, here was my response:

The problem is that they are rather specious questions. Where is the scientific experiment conducted by Leprechaun-deniers that definitively proved that "There are no Leprechauns?” How did they define the Leprechaun whom they state doesn't exist? (I quoted the article, substituting Leprechaun for God)

I do not lose any sleep over not answering such questions. If someone wants to feel they scored points on me when I don’t, enjoy. I have no motivation to spend the effort to believe in Leprechauns when there is no reason to. I don’t believe in Leprechauns… but if I saw one, I would be happy to have been wrong and I think the event would be amazing. It is the same with deities.

“To speak of God properly…” Mr. Hart shows he is playing with loaded dice from his first statement. In this sense, he is no different from the varied other theists I have encountered in my life. From the Hell, Fire, and Brimstone preacher, to the pentecostal healer, to the prosperity pastor… they all want to tell me how to view God “properly”. Even believers whom I respect such as Borg, Spong, and Rohr have their own take on viewing God “properly”. In the end, I don’t think these people are telling me about God, they are telling me about themselves… but that is another thread.

I once had an ex-Mormon friend of mine who said, “Mormonism really is a beautiful belief structure… but you have to stay within their box of thinking to make it work.” Many of the arguments made for theism, or against atheism, have this kind of set-up… you have to accept certain premises in order for the argument to work. If someone tells me – “Here is what Atheism is!” and it doesn’t line up with how I think about my atheism, all of their arguments thereafter are meaningless. (I think the reverse is also true, so I rarely go after someone on their theism and stick to my problems with harmful dogma.)

It is similar to when my 2nd-grade students want to tell me a joke/riddle that starts with a question. When I answer in a way they had not anticipated, they start over and instruct me on how to answer “properly”.  In order for the joke/riddle to work, I have to give the right response. When it is over, they are gleeful with their joke/riddle telling skills and I play along, but it is a contrivance.

Any argument where I have to accept a very narrow (or very vague) premise from the get-go in order for the argument to work is a contrivance. Such arguments work for the already convinced, but to those outside the acceptance of the foundational premise, it simply doesn’t sell.

Holy Gwappo

Like Deadpool's buddy... don't count on me to not spill the beans.  I will sing like a canary.

I had a kidney stone that had to be retrieved. They put in a stent and removed it a week later.

Let me tell you... next time I'll keep the kidney stone.

I knew this was not going to be good.  The nurse said he was going to give me a numbing agent... but it shouldn't hurt.

And yet, it did.

So already this was following the pattern of a bladder scope they did on me a few years ago.  They too said the numbing agent wouldn't hurt.  They too said that the numbing agent should keep me from experiencing any real pain from the scope.  So when they told me today that I shouldn't feel much, I broke out in a cold sweat and fought the urge to run from the room.

And yep... it hurt.  Needle being pushed through your urethra hurt.

Apparently, other humans get numbed by the stuff they shoot up your willy... but me not so much.

I was breathing like a woman giving birth and blurting out uncontrolled gasps as that stent grabber pushed its way toward the target.  A procedure that should only be a few minutes seemed to be taking forever.

"We're past your bladder... almost there!" my doctor encouraged while the nurse told me to slow down my breathing.

Then it hit.  THE pain.  The most I have ever felt.

"HOLY GWAPPO!!!" I yelped.

"Holy gwappo??" the nurse and doc said in unison.

"I have no idea what that meant," I laughed painfully.  "Apparently years of elementary teaching filters out swearing even under the most ardent stress."

I have a feeling for the rest of the day I was known as the holy gwappo patient.  🙂

Anyway, that experience made me think of this scene from Deadpool.  I would totally be like TJ Miller's character.

You Have To Believe SOMETHING

When I first recognized that my faith was really slipping away, that this wasn't a phase or a path I could retreat from, I admit I felt a little sense of panic.  For a number of months, I wrestled with the question, "If I am not a Christian, what am I?'  Agnosticism seemed too vague, and I wasn't yet ready to abandon the idea of some form of deity.

So, I started to do some casual research into the more Eastern, meditative, god-as-the-force kind of religions.  For a while, I was becoming very interested in the Bahia faith... but then I read about their negative beliefs concerning homosexuals, and that was an immediate shutdown.

At some point, I realized that I was feeling an obligation to "Believe" something... and that maybe, just maybe, no such requirement existed.

Teaching Is A Conservative Profession

"For a full century now, conservative politicians have attacked teachers to score easy political points. This, despite the fact that teachers, as a group, tend to consider themselves “moderate” (43 percent) or even “conservative” (27 percent), and their political views have long tended to match those of their local communities. Nevertheless, scare tactics about subversive teachers have been too tempting for politicians to resist. But although targeting teachers might score a short-term payoff at the ballot box, those attacks have always harmed public schools by driving teachers away."

--------------------

This article is an interesting history of political attacks on the teaching profession.  It is funny because, as the article states, the profession itself is fairly "conservative".  Regardless of a teacher's personal religious or political beliefs... they just want to get through the material for the day.  There is enough drama and excitement in a school without trying to create any more of it.

I will say that the present state of affairs is the worst I have seen in my 30 years.  Principals used to have stacks of resumes on their desks from would-be teachers.  Substitutes (mostly wannabe teachers) circled the buildings like vultures looking for an opening, hoping to make a good impression on the staff.

Now, there are no subs.  Principals have to beg and plead for a resume or two.  Universities are scaling back their teaching programs as student applications plummet.

Well, politicians... you have done it.  You used lies, exaggeration, and outliers to enrage the public and fill your campaign accounts.  Schools are holding on by a thread.

Now, what are you going to do?

The Meaning of Life

“The meaning of life is just to be alive. It is so plain and so obvious and so simple. And yet, everybody rushes around in a great panic as if it were necessary to achieve something beyond themselves.”  -Alan Watts

A friend posted this quote this morning and it tracks perfectly with where I have been at the past few years.  In the religious circles in which I traveled earlier in life, there was great emphasis on "living a life of meaning" and finding your "purpose".  I suppose that doesn't sound bad on the surface, maybe even noble, but what I discovered over time was that it was like, as the book of Ecclesiastes says, "chasing after the wind and feeding on it".  It was never-ending and never satisfying.  It keeps you running on a hamster wheel.

In recent years, I have been learning to let go of the rushing... saying no to the panic.

In the book The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Ford Prefect saves his friend Arthur from the destruction of the Earth.  When Arthur realizes he can't go back, he asks, "What do I do now?"  Ford shrugs, "You come with me and enjoy yourself."  Ford's suggestion has become my life tagline.

In an episode of Rick and Morty, Rick gives the family a device that allows them to see themselves in other universes - lives in which they had made different choices.  They grow depressed and angry as they see how their lives could have been "better" had they chosen different paths.  Rick tells them they would have been happier watching TV with him and Morty and that they, "clearly backed the wrong conceptual horse."  Later, Morty's sister is going to run away due to her frustration.  Morty gives an explanation of why she should stay and ends it with, “Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, and everybody’s gonna die. Come watch TV.”

For myself, I have spent enough time on the hamster wheel chasing after things and never arriving.  I think Watts had it right.  My time is better spent creating, enjoying, and breathing.  There are good conversations to be had, meals to enjoy, stories to listen to, and walks to take.

That's How Love Works

Recently, someone threatened me with Hell again. This person had various reasons why God was justified in sending me there, but their chief reason was that I "reject" God.

This is my cat. She rejects me every #$%^&*# day (but she loves my wife). Do you know what my response has NEVER been?

"Let's torture the little shit for eternity!"

In fact, regardless of her response to me, I love Lu. I will always care for her and always protect her.

That's how LOVE works.

Instruction Over Practice

I think one of the major failures of education over the past few decades has been an overemphasis on instruction.  Educational reformers have told teachers, school districts, legislators... anyone who would listen... that a student could become proficient at anything if they were "taught" it correctly.

Imagine a baseball team that avoided practice.  An orchestra that never rehearsed.  A military unit that never drilled.  An officer who has been instructed in firearms but rarely fires one.

What are you good at?  In most cases, it is the thing that you spent time practicing.  Instruction is wonderful, but it doesn't tend to go very far without time spent on the instructed task.

However, an expectation of practice puts some of the ownership on the one being instructed... and that doesn't work for our consumer economy.  No, the customer is always right.  In a student as consumer environment, all responsibility is put on the instructor.

Teachers are leaving the classroom in droves.  People always say we need to raise salaries to stop the hemorrhaging.  It may help a little, but pay for teachers has ALWAYS been on the low side.

I think what really changed was that all responsibility for the child's education moved to the teacher.  It used to be more of a partnership between home, teacher, and child, but now a child's success or lack thereof is resting with the teacher alone.

Joey practices.  Jimmy does not.  When Jimmy fails to advance, no one considers that perhaps it has something to do with his lack of time on task.  In today's schools, the teacher is saddled with extra paperwork and data meetings to try to adjust instruction in such a way that will allow Jimmy to be as proficient as Joey... but never require that Jimmy actually do anything.

Or, maybe, Jimmy really is working at it... but he still can't achieve Joey's level of proficiency. He just isn't as gifted in this area as Joey. Again, in this scenario, the teacher is still evaluated as coming up short.  According to the educational reformers, teachers should be able to move all students to equal ability... regardless of time on task or natural talent.

This is why so many teachers quit within the first 5 years now.  Being responsible to do a good job teaching is one thing.  Being responsible for every x-factor in a student's education is demoralizing.

Teacher Evaluations

Forbes recently published an article entitled "This Decade-Long Experiment In Teacher Evaluation Is An Unsurprising Failure".  The whole article is worth a read, but it can be summed up in this quote-

"a raft of research told us that test scores were hugely correlated to factors far beyond a teacher’s control. The effect is that a “good” teacher is one who’s been put in a classroom with high-scoring students, and a “bad” one is in a classroom with low-scoring students."

I experienced this first hand.  I spent 8 years in a Title One school before the ten in a wealthy neighborhood where I presently teach.  I could go on for pages describing the differences.  

If it were all about the teacher... as present evaluation methods assume... there should have been no change in "my" scores when I moved schools.  Student circumstance, ability, and predilections shouldn't matter.  However, unsurprisingly, "my" scores got a good boost when I switched schools.

I enjoyed teaching at my Title One school.  I knew a lot of amazing teachers there.  But none of them stayed.  It was not that teaching Title One kids was difficult... it was the score pressure.  My admin and our district support staff literally believed that the reason our school did not score as well as our district's wealthy East-side schools was due to the teachers.  As was stated by my admin and reading coach during a staff meeting where teachers were being blamed for low scores, "Backman students will start scoring like Bonneville students when Backman teachers start teaching like Bonneville teachers."

Well, after a few years of being browbeaten like that, I moved to one of our East-side schools.  Apparently, that was all I needed to do to become a "good" teacher.

Underlying all of this is a misguided notion that students can be instructed into proficiency.  Teachers are evaluated as if they are the only x-factor in student outcomes.  This approach has nearly ruined the teaching profession in America.  More troubling is that there is little will in our nation to change it.

Does EVERYONE Worship?

This was a bit of a conversation I had with a believer on a thread where the writer was claiming that Atheists "worship" things like science.

Andrew Hackman 

No... this is projection. Having been a believer, I know what that experience looks and feels like. I do not worship. There is something though, in many of those who worship, that needs to universalize that experience. They need to say, "Everyone worships". However, it simply isn't true.

Angela
Andrew Hackman how do you define worship? 

Andrew Hackman 
   NOUN the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity. "the worship of God" VERB show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites.

I think the dictionary definition sums it up. Now, what usually happens at this point is the meaning of worship gets watered down in an attempt to pull unbelievers into the definition. Having affection, admiration, or interest in something starts to get defined as worship.

Angela 

Thanks, interesting. Wikipedia definition with some of the history of the word below. As a former atheist, I view worship as whatever we deem worthy of our time, attention, adoration, money, and resources. Not all worship is bad, for believers “it” shouldn’t be worshipped more/higher than God. I do sincerely believe for example, modern sports obsession “for some” is a form of worship. From decals to literal idol statues, blankets, hours of focus, clothes, people will spend their time money and focus to a point of obsession... almost like we are hardwired that way. Or to stand in awe at a concert and be obsessed with a singer. Jesus taught “where your treasure is, there your heart is also.” It’s a matter of the heart, and deeply personal for all of us. “The word is derived from the Old English weorþscipe, meaning to venerate "worship, honor shown to an object, which has been etymologised as "worthiness or worth-ship"—to give, at its simplest, worth to something.” -Wiki

This definition doesn’t say anything about a deity, just putting value on something deemed “worthy”

Andrew Hackman
But again... you are watering down the word worship. You are stating that what you think and feel about Jesus is what I think and feel about Disc Golf. Is that really the digression you and folks like Keller want to make? I don't think it is. I think your elevation of the word worship is much higher in usual circumstances... but for some reason, it bothers you that unbelievers don't "worship" anything... so during an argument, you broaden the definition of the word. Lots of believers I know do this linguistic sleight of hand. I think believers need to do a little introspection into what drives them to do this. 

In other words, why can't believers just say, "We worship a deity, unbelievers don't" and just leave it at that? You could even make the case of why an unbeliever SHOULD worship your deity. But what drives the need to tell someone they DO worship, when they have told you that they don't? 

Rosemary 
Worship is in the context of what the post is ...is to me ...when it comes to saying yes to God. Above all others.  Obedience. Love him with all your heart mind soul. 

Andrew Hackman 
Yes... worship is beyond love, it has that obedience, singular, totality... it is not as trivial as, "Oh, she is really excited about that new novel!"