In my previous post I briefly discussed the important, but all too
misconstrued, notion of worldview. In this post and the next, I want to
continue by exploring just what a worldview is and why people, Christians in
particular, should think worldviewishly.
In this first part, I explore two definitions of
worldview. My goal is to constructively interact with each definition, pulling
out and discussing the essential concepts that make up a worldview.
Ronald Nash
What is a worldview? Perhaps Ronald Nash defined it as
succinctly as can be when he said, “a worldview is a set of beliefs about the
most important issues in life.” [1] As noted in the previous post, all of us
form a variety of beliefs about such issues as: God, ultimate reality,
knowledge, human nature, ethics, and afterlife. Our beliefs on such important
issues often inform our beliefs on lesser important issues. Let’s call the
former “control beliefs.” [2] Not all beliefs are on par with one another. Our
theories about life are not based merely on the data from the outside world,
but on the means by which we organize such data. Think of our beliefs as having
a structure. Some beliefs, that is, our control beliefs, “outrank” others in
order of importance. These “control beliefs” may be based on a variety of
factors, such as, scientific theories, philosophical arguments, religious
beliefs, or cultural practices. How ought we to think of these control beliefs?
Suppose your friend, Sarah, says to you, “teachers should never show favoritism
in their classrooms.” Upon questioning Sarah about her view, she retorts back
to you, “because God created all humans in His image and likeness.” (cf. Gen
1:26-27; 9:6; Js 3:9). In this case, Sarah’s belief about how teachers should
treat students within the classroom depends on the control belief, “because God
created all humans in His image and likeness.” So, in regards to our
examination of this first definition, worldviews, then, are the kinds of things
that include beliefs about the most important issues in life. These beliefs
about important issues often inform other beliefs we have.
James Sire
I now want to take a look at a second definition by James
Sire. In his classic book, The Universe
Next Door, Sire defines a worldview as “a
commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a
story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially
true or entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously,
consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and
that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being.”
[3]
I find Sire’s definition helpful for a couple of reasons.
First, I think Sire rightly states that a worldview, essentially, is a “commitment”
or “fundamental orientation of the heart.” As noted in our above discussion, we
all have these “control beliefs” which influence and inform many of our other
beliefs. To such beliefs (i.e., control beliefs) we are ultimately committed; and
still, to some of those, more than others. Moreover, worldviews are not made up
of merely intellectual assent to certain beliefs. If such beliefs do “control” other
beliefs that we have, then, such control beliefs are deeply-seated within the
very core of who we are. But I would also suggest that certain attitudes and
experiences, along with our basic character dispositions, often affect how we perceive the world, accept data, or respond in certain situations. We can be committed to
certain attitudes, experiences, and character dispositions just as much as we are to our
beliefs.
Secondly, I would agree with Sire that a worldview is not,
necessarily, “a story or set of propositions,” but can, nevertheless, be
expressed in such ways. Suppose you one day arrive upon, what seems to be, an
extraterrestrial. For our purposes we’ll call him “Mork.” Mork has never had a
piece of pizza before, and you set out on the all-important task of describing pizza
to him. You inform Mork that pizza is quite possibly the best tasting substance
known to man (especially the Chicago variety). You go on by telling him that it’s
made up of crust, sauce made from tomatoes, cheese, pepperoni, and a variety of
other ingredients of the person’s choosing. Now, Mork may be able to form an
idea in his E.T. brain of what pizza is, but that idea, or your description,
even, are not the same as experiencing the pizza itself. In a similar way (I
understand that analogies do break down), one can only describe (by story or by
a set of presuppositions) what one’s worldview is. The descriptions themselves
are not the worldview. Worldviews are, in many ways, person dependent (meaning that no two worldviews are exactly the same); however,
worldviews among individuals can, nevertheless, overlap on many key (and/or
minor) issues. Note the following illustrations:
Notice in illustration A, two people belonging to two
different denominations may share a variety of beliefs (or express a similar
story), e.g., God is tri-une, Jesus is the Son of God incarnate, God created
the space-time universe, etc. Many of their core beliefs, practices, etc.,
overlap. In the second illustration, illustration B, each of the three major
monotheistic (the belief that only one God exists) religions have much in
common, yet, there are some striking differences. For example, each of the
three major monotheistic religions believe that only one God exists, that [generally]
God has certain essential attributes (omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence,
transcendence, and immanence), that God created the universe out of nothing,
that there is a judgment and afterlife, and so on. Yet, they differ in respect
to other key issues. While all three monotheistic religions accept portions of
the Old Testament as sacred Scripture, Jews and Muslims reject the New
Testament as authoritative Scripture. Moreover, Judaism and Islam accept Jesus
as a good prophet, but he surely was not the Son of God, nor was he divine in
any sense of the word. Yet, Jesus, according to Christian theology, is God the
Son incarnate. Further, Christians and Jews generally do not accept Muhammad as
a prophet; whereas, Muslims do. With respect to the essential nature of God,
Christians believe that God is tri-personal (Trinity), that is to say, God is
eternally existent as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and not mono-personal, as
Jews and Muslims view God. Despite similarities, Christians will differ in their worldviews, in fundamental ways, from Jews and Muslims, and hence are further removed than, say, possibly two people from differing denominations.
Some worldviews, on the other hand, have far much less in
common, and, one might say, radically opposed to one another. Consider the
diagram below (illustration C):
In this diagram, we see that Christianity and Atheism are
diametrically opposed to one another. This opposition has to do with their having different control beliefs. This does not mean, however, that there
is no overlap between the two views (nor does this mean that an atheist and Christian can't get along and be friends). Surely there are some similarities (especially, potentially, between two individuals). For example, a Christian and an atheist
may both share the belief that nature is uniform and that we can learn about the world through scientific endeavor or that it is always morally
unacceptable to torture a child for the fun of it. Each person can agree on such beliefs despite how they've individually arrived at such a conclusion. The fundamental difference has to do with how each view handles the question as to whether God exists. Atheists believe that [probably] no
God or gods exist. Christian theists, on the other hand, believe that, not only
does God exist, but how one responds to Him matters. Belief that God exists or
belief that no god(s) exists becomes the "control belief" and foundation for all (or, at least, many) other beliefs. Hence,
how an atheist lives in and interprets the world stands in fundamental opposition to how a Christian approaches and interprets life. This opposition comes down to "control beliefs."
Lastly, there’s one other part to Sire’s definition that
I want to bring out. It’s the issue of truth and consistency. As Sire rightly
explains, sometimes our assumptions are entirely true, partially true, or
entirely false. While each of us would like to think that our beliefs are true,
our believing something doesn’t make it true. I may believe that the moon is
made up of green cheese; however, just because I believe it’s so doesn’t make
it so. Further, sometimes we hold to our beliefs consciously, that is, we are
aware of our beliefs, while other times, we are unaware of them (unconsciously).
For example, suppose I believe that the scientific method is the best way to
yield knowledge about the universe. This is a conscious belief that I have.
However, this assumption rests on a fundamental presupposition, namely, that
nature is uniform. While I may hold to the first belief consciously, “that the
scientific method is the best way to yield knowledge about the universe,” I may
not be aware of the underpinning presupposition that such a belief is grounded in.
Finally, some beliefs to which we hold are often held inconsistently with other
beliefs that we might have. For example, suppose that Jones believes that people
are nothing more than so-called “meat-machines,” that is, humans are nothing
more than organic machines with the brain functioning as a kind of computer.
Yet, (without holding to belief in a personal soul or some kind of bodily
resurrection) he holds to the belief that one day he will get to meet his dead loved
ones again. Such a view would appear contradictory.
Summary
Having considered both definitions, we can conclude the
following about worldviews:
·
Everyone has a worldview.
·
Worldviews differ among individuals, sometimes
drastically, other times with great overlap.
·
At the heart of a worldview is commitment to a
certain set of beliefs or a story.
·
Worldviews often contain a variety of beliefs,
some of which are “control beliefs,” informing a variety of other beliefs or
how a person responds to data from the world.
·
Experiences, attitudes, and character
dispositions also affect a person’s overall outlook of the world and reception
of certain data.
·
Worldview assumptions are often true, partially
true, or false; conscious or unconscious; and consistent or inconsistent.
Endnotes
[1] Ronald H. Nash. Worldviews
in Conflict: Choosing Christianity in a World of Ideas. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1992.
[2] Arthur F. Holmes. Contours
of a Worldview. Grand Rapids MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1983.
[3] James W. Sire. The
Universe Next Door, fourth edition. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
2004.
