That’s not a bad idea. But it does require some social cost since I don’t sincerely believe Quaker doctrines and don’t want to signal to others that I do or might. It looks like there’s a reasonable contingent of nontheist Quakers. Maybe I can get the same signaling benefit from affiliation with the American Humanist Association.
But the point is well-taken. This would be a money-cheap way to signal pacifism, but for me it is a socially-expensive way to attempt it. Paying for donations to orgs would probably be cheaper overall in my preference ordering.
As you noticed in reply to TimS below, the out is heavily weighted toward religious objections. That’s partly the result of religion’s privileged position in society, but also because they expect pacifism to be the output of some philosophy you hold, not your philosophy itself.
So, even if you have a long history of anti-war donations, the draft board is going to need to hear some Theory of Everything that has pacifism as a derivable theorem, not an axiom.
Do you think it’s wise to only give them some Theory of Everything? That is, can I push down Pr(conscription) by thinking hard about how to describe my Theory of Everything and giving visible signs that I actually believe it. It just seems awfully risky, especially being an atheist, to rely solely on hoping my impassioned account of my views will convince them alone. Sure, donations or other pacifist actions might not help much if I can’t give a Theory of Everything. But that same deficiency might apply in reverse too.
I agree. I’m not sure how that adds to the thread though. I already held that position before posting this and wanted to address whatever component of conscientious objection there is that is specifically orthogonal to the ToE portion.
Or you can just join a Quaker meeting.
That’s not a bad idea. But it does require some social cost since I don’t sincerely believe Quaker doctrines and don’t want to signal to others that I do or might. It looks like there’s a reasonable contingent of nontheist Quakers. Maybe I can get the same signaling benefit from affiliation with the American Humanist Association.
But the point is well-taken. This would be a money-cheap way to signal pacifism, but for me it is a socially-expensive way to attempt it. Paying for donations to orgs would probably be cheaper overall in my preference ordering.
As you noticed in reply to TimS below, the out is heavily weighted toward religious objections. That’s partly the result of religion’s privileged position in society, but also because they expect pacifism to be the output of some philosophy you hold, not your philosophy itself.
So, even if you have a long history of anti-war donations, the draft board is going to need to hear some Theory of Everything that has pacifism as a derivable theorem, not an axiom.
Do you think it’s wise to only give them some Theory of Everything? That is, can I push down Pr(conscription) by thinking hard about how to describe my Theory of Everything and giving visible signs that I actually believe it. It just seems awfully risky, especially being an atheist, to rely solely on hoping my impassioned account of my views will convince them alone. Sure, donations or other pacifist actions might not help much if I can’t give a Theory of Everything. But that same deficiency might apply in reverse too.
You may want to invest some time in your ToE, regardless of the potential for conscription. :)
I agree. I’m not sure how that adds to the thread though. I already held that position before posting this and wanted to address whatever component of conscientious objection there is that is specifically orthogonal to the ToE portion.