But you aren't disagreeing, you're trying to redefine algebra based on personal preferences, in other words, you're arguing for the ascendancy of postmodernism (the idea that there are no shared truths, that everything is a matter of opinion and outlook). The problem with arguing from a postmodern perspective is that the argument instantly self-destructs (it applies first to itself, which means if you're right, then I have the right to ignore you).
The essential foundation of dialogue is consensus, shared ideas, and shared word definitions. Without those, there's no possibility for dialogue.
> Your definition of algebra (beyond the naming of symbols, or variables in programming parlance) is not useful to most people.
Utility is not the basis on which words are defined. Words mean what they mean, how we feel about those meanings is irrelevant.
> I think people would be much better served implicitly dropping out than explicitly.
So those who are qualified to be in school can be surrounded by those who aren't?
> If they understood it [science] was much more about teamwork and physical setting up and running equipment/software and thinking creatively ...
That's not what science is about, unless plumbing is about wrenches. You're confusing the practice of science with the idea of science.