Document_20240624_0001.pdf

WHAT I5 WORLI]VIEW? The unexamined life is not worth living. SOCRATES Three friends once went to a nature preserve in the African Serengeti and experienced the majestic beauty and diversity of native African...

WHAT I5 WORLI]VIEW? The unexamined life is not worth living. SOCRATES Three friends once went to a nature preserve in the African Serengeti and experienced the majestic beauty and diversity of native African wildlife— zebra, elephant, gazelle, lion, and rhinoceros. Each was awestruck by the diversity of creatures observed. The first friend, John Luther, commented boldly: "The Lord God has definitely created an amazing array of creatures that sing his praises and declare his glory to the ends of the earth, has he not?" The second friend, Charles Dawkins, immediately responded: An amazing array of creatures, to be sure. But you err, my good man, in ascribing their existence to a Creator. No, these incredible animals are the result of the unguided, purposeless combination of random mutation and natural selection. We too are the product of a natural evolutionary process. Indeed, we are no different from the creatures that we see:' The third friend, Shirley Chopra, serenely replied: "I pray you both would be enlightened to the full reality disclosed by our brothers and sisters on the nature preserve. For they too bear the same spark of di- vinity that lies within you and me. Do you not sense them calling to you, seeking to communicate with your spirit? We are all potential gods and goddesses; we just need to awaken to our heightened state and take hold of the possibilities that lie before us:' The three friends see the same animals within the same nature pre- serve. Thus, they experience the same objective truth. Nevertheless, due 8 PART I-Introducing Worldview to their vastly different perspectives, the three friends see different things. Why? Simply put, John, Charles, and Shirley are experiencing a clash of worldviews. A worldview, as we will define it, is the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and interpret the world and our place within it. The three safari friends wear different worldview glasses; thus, although they see the same thing, they actually see the world and their place within it very differently. In 1999, the blockbuster film The Matrix was released. It was followed by two sequels in 2003 and ranks as one of Hollywood's most successful trilogies. The Matrix (1999) envisions a hypothetical futuristic scenario where humans have made increasingly sophisticated computers, complete with artificial intelligence. Eventually, the computers develop sufficient independent intelligence to wage war against their human creators. The computers win the battle and subsequently enslave the human race. Humans, however, are generally oblivious to this reality. Why? Because they are trapped in the Matrix. The world that people experience is an illusion—the result of an intricate computer simulation. In the real world, computers breed human beings in order to hook them up to machines and suck the heat and energy out of their bodies. The real world sees human bodies grown in vast fields, hooked up to electrical inputs to harvest their resources, and also linked to visual simulators that treat them to a virtual reality This virtual reality resembles human life on earth as we know it (in 1999, when the movie was released). The human beings attached to these machines have the vivid experience of working normal jobs, having relationships, and so forth. The virtual reality is so compelling that people do not realize they are being manipulated and deceived. However, a group of humans who have been awakened to the true nature of reality wage a quiet rebellion against the Matrix. In the movie, the focus is on Thomas Anderson (aka Neo), a computer hacker who questions his reality but has no concept of the true world. Morpheus and Trinity, two "liberated" humans, seek to enlighten Neo. They offer him two pills: one will return him to his virtual reality life; the other will show him what is really real. Neo famously takes the red pill, which opens his eyes to the illusion, and his world is forever changed. He will never look at things the same way again. He used to have one sense of CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 9 objective reality but now has a very different perspective. Neo now sees the world through a new lens, a new theoretical structure. Basically, he has a new worldview. 1.1 WELTANSCHAUUNG: THE ORIGIN OF WORLDVIEW THOUGHT The English term worldview is derived from the German Weltan- schauung, a compound word (Welt = world + Anschauung = view or outlook) first used by Immanuel Kant to describe an individual's sensory perception of the world. The term spread quickly in German idealist philosophy "to refer to an intellectual conception of the universe from the perspective of a human knower?" In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, German philosophers used Weltanschauung in- creasingly for the concept of answering pivotal questions regarding life, the universe, and everything. Very quickly, other German thinkers— von Ranke (history), Wagner (music), Feuerbach (theology), and von Humboldt (physics)—applied Weltanschauung to their own disciplines. Furthermore, Weltanschauung was quickly adopted in other European countries, either as a loanword or translated into the local language. The value of worldview language and thought was quickly recognized across disciplines and languages so that "since its inception in Immanuel Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790, the notion of Weltanschauung has become one of the central intellectual conceptions in contemporary thought and culture:'2 The roots of worldview thought are in philosophy. Nonetheless, worldview has become integral to other disciplines as well. Michael Po- lanyi, Thomas Kuhn, and Imre Lakatos have been instrumental in ap- plying worldview thought to the natural sciences. Psychologists, in- cluding Freud and Jung, have utilized worldview terminology and thought. Worldview has gained importance in sociology, particularly as sociologists like Karl Mannheim and Peter Berger have raised awareness of the pretheoretical construction of individual worldviews. Other than philosophy, the discipline that has been most influenced by worldview thought is cultural anthropology. In the mid-1900s, Robert 'David K. Naugle, Woridview: The History of a Concept (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 59. 2lbid., 66. To PART I-Introducing Worldview Redfield identified culturally prevalent worldviews, arguing that worldview "is the way a people characteristically look outward upon the universe:' He distinguished worldview from culture and ethos, suggesting that worldview "is an arrangement of things looked out upon, things in first instance conceived of as existing."3 Redfield suggested common compo- nents of worldview—distinction between self and others, distinction be- tween man and not-man, and view of birth and death. Michael Kearney, writing a generation after Redfield, continues to draw out the importance of worldview for cultural anthropologists. A cultural worldview, according to Kearney, is "a set of images and assumptions about the world" and in- cludes components of self and other, relationship (between self and other humans and nonhumans), classification, causality, and space and time.4 Anthropologist Paul Hiebert defines worldview as "the fundamental cognitive, affective, and evaluative presuppositions a group of people make about the nature of things, and which they use to order their lives."5 Hiebert sees cognitive, affective, and moral aspects to worldview and identifies six worldview functions.6 Hiebert argues that the transfor- mation of the nonbeliever's underlying worldview lies at the core of the missionary task. The importance of worldview thought in other disciplines cannot ob- scure its centrality in philosophy. It was particularly prominent in the work of nineteenth-century German philosophers, including Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Schelling, Georg Hegel, Wilhelm Dilthey, and Friedrich Nietzsche. Worldview thought and development continued in twentieth-century philosophy, with significant contributions from Edmund Husserl, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Donald Davidson, and Ludwig Wittgenstein. 'Robert Redfield, The Primitive World and Its Transformations (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1953), 85-87. 4Michael Kearney, World View (Novato, CA: Chandler & Sharp, 1984), 10,68-98. See also Naugle, Worldview, 241-43. 'Paul G. Hiebert, Transforming Worldviews: An Anthropological Understanding of How People Change (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 15. s(1) Providing a map of reality that structures our perceptions of reality and our guide for living, (2) conveying emotional security, (3) validating deep cultural norms, (4) integrating the indi- vidual into the culture, (5) monitoring cultural change, and (6) providing psychological reassur- ance that the world is as we perceive it to be. Hiebert, Transforming Worldviews, 29-30. CHAPTER 1—What's Worldview? II Worldview has been particularly prominent in Christian philosophy since the late nineteenth century. James Orr, Abraham Kuyper, and Herman Dooyeweerd were instrumental in bringing worldview into the evangelical Christian conversation. For Orr, seeing Christianity as a worldview helps focus philosophical discussion and debate. He argues that disagreement between Christians and non-Christians is not a matter of a particular doctrine or belief but a matter of underlying worldviews. The influence of Orr and other Christian philosophers can be discerned in this text, including James Olthuis, James Sire, Ronald Nash, David Naugle, Michael Goheen, Ken Samples, Arthur Holmes, Andrew Hof- fecker, Doug Groothuis, Doug Huffman, Norm Geisler, and Brian Walsh. REFLECTION UIIESTIONS 1 In the opening story, the three friends see the same animals but dif- ferent realities. What are some other situations where you think people with different worldviews would interpret reality differently? 2 Why do you think worldview has had so much more prominence in philosophy than in other academic disciplines? 1.2 CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW DEFINED For the purposes of this book, the concept ofworldviewwill be approached from the perspective of Christian philosophy and education. We ac- knowledge the existence and value of alternative conceptions ofworldview and believe that they have their rightful place within other disciplines. For example, a student preparing for foreign missions would be well advised to focus on Paul Hiebert's missiological exposition of worldview and to learn from what cultural anthropologists Michael Kearney and Robert Redfield have to say about worldview. Our primary purposes, however, are neither missiological nor anthropological. Rather, we are concerned with the holistic intellectual-spiritual formation of the Christian student—to nurture students toward loving the Lord our God with all their hearts, souls, minds, and strength. We are convinced that learning to think in terms of worldview can help students grow in their love for God. What, then, is a worldview, what does it look like, and why does it matter? I2 PART I-Introducing Worldview 1.2.1 What is woridview? We have defined woridview, provisionally, as "the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and in- terpret the world and our place within it:' There is, however, a mul- titude of ways to define and explain worldview; we will survey a few of them for helpful insights. Steven Cowan and James Spiegel define woridview as "a set of beliefs, values, and presuppositions concerning life's most fundamental issues.."2 They argue that the central goal of philosophy is constructing and devel- oping a comprehensive worldview. For example, if you ask about the philosophy of Rene Descartes or David Hume or Socrates, what you are really asking is, what is their worldview? From this perspective, worldview is primarily an intellectual construction, a rational system of belief. Worldview certainly has a rational component. If nothing else, worldview necessarily involves an understanding of the world that can be expressed in terms of intellectual propositions8It is possible, however, to overintellectualize worldview and to think of it strictly in terms of intellectual propositions or rational systems. When this happens, worldview is equated to a formal philosophical system and becomes an abstract concept that seems applicable only to an educated elite. More problematically, a strictly rationalistic presentation of worldview thinking misconstrues the nature of human beings by suggesting that we are primarily or exclusively thinking beings. There is no doubt that we are indeed thinking beings. Our ability to conceptualize, to theorize, to reflect, and to synthesize is an essential and nonnegotiable element of human nature. The problem arises with the implication that human beings approach the world primarily or exclusively rationally, evalu- ating competing truth claims and embracing those that they are con- vinced are the most logical and rationally compelling. It seems instead that our worldview is most commonly formed (at least initially) without 'Steven B. Cowan and James S. Spiegel, The Love ofWisdom: A Christian Introduction to Philosophy (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2009), 7. 'A proposition, simply put, is a sentence (or multiple sentences) that makes a truth daim. A proposition (e.g., Edmonton is the capital of the province of Alberta in the country known as Canada) asserts something that it claims is true of the real world. A worldview truth claim could be something like 'We are all living in the matrix—what we think is really real, is really not real at all!' CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? r3 intellectual propositions or rational deliberation. A purely rationalistic picture of human beings seems to miss the prerational (or pretheoretical) and sometimes nonrational nature ofworldview and worldviewformation. 1.2.2 James Sire's understanding of worldview. James Sire, arguably the most influential evangelical worldview proponent over the past two generations, acknowledges that his early worldview thinking was stunted by hyperrationalism. His classic text, The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog, is currently in its fifth edition. The first three editions focused on worldview as primarily a set of basic concepts or intellectual presuppositions.9 After rethinking his approach, Sire thoroughly revised his understanding and explanation of worldview. Sire no longer under- stands or explains worldview in terms of philosophical propositions alone. Instead, he provides a comprehensive and holistic definition: A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assump- tions 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.10 Sire's definition is helpful on several levels and deserves to be unpacked. 1.2.2.1 A matter of the heart. First, Sire notes that worldview is not simply a set of intellectual or rational ideas but rather reflects a "com- mitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart:' The heart, on this un- derstanding, represents the center of the human person. David Naugle notes that when worldview is reinterpreted in light of the doctrine of the heart, not only is its true source located, but it becomes a richer concept than its philosophical counterpart, being more than just a reference to an abstract thesis about reality, but an Hebraic expression of the existential condition of the whole person." 'James W. Sire, Naming the Elephant: Worldview as a Concept, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: WP Academic, 2015), 13. "James W. She, The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog, 5th ed. (Downers Grove, IL: Wi' Academic, 2009), 21. "Naugle, Worldview, 270. 14 PART I-Introducing Wortdview Many people are relatively unconscious of their worldview assumptions because they have developed these commitments internally and em- braced them as orientations of the heart. 1.2.2.2 Propositions or narratives. Second, Sire notes that worldview can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions. There has been a tendency in modern Western philosophy to reduce worldview beliefs to a propositional format, a tendency that certainly has its benefits. In reality, however, the philosophical and religious beliefs of human beings are more commonly shared and passed down through story, not through a set of philosophical propositions. We are storied creatures, responding more readily to narrative than to doctrine. From a Christian perspective, it is worth noting that the Scriptures are predominantly narrative in form. Jesus of Nazareth preferred to teach through story, utilizing the unique teaching tool of parables—brief narratives packing a powerful rhetorical punch. Thus, while Sire notes that worldview can take a nar- rative or a propositional format, for the vast majority of people past and present, worldview is narrative in structure. 1.2.2.3 True, false, and in between. Third, Sire observes that our worldview presumptions maybe true, partially true, or entirely false. We each hold a variety of worldview beliefs, but merely holding these beliefs does not make them true. The Christian understanding that all human beings are fallen and sinful gives us reason for significant pause and epistemological humility. Knowing that we are fallen creatures and that we do not have the mind of God reminds us that we are unlikely to possess an entirely correct worldview. Worldviews will inevitably be a mixture of truth and error. This is not to say that all worldviews possess an equal proportion of truth; rather, it is to insist that no one possesses a God's-eye view of the world. 1.2.2.4 Conscious or unconscious. Fourth, Sire notes that many people maintain their worldviews consciously and explicitly while others are entirely unaware of the worldviews that they hold. Worldviews are pretheoreticalin nature; they develop prior to or devoid of conscious reflection and rational deliberation. As children, our developing worldview is most strongly influenced by our parents—hence the fact that most teens inherit the worldviews of their parents. Other influences, CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 15 including culture, education, media, and religion, help shape the uncon- scious worldview that develops. As Randy Nelson notes, "Most people take for granted the beliefs that they inherit from these sources, as- suming them to be true without intentionally questioning them"2 People are not conscious of their worldviews unless they have been chal- lenged to think explicitly about their core beliefs and commitments. Each person possesses a worldview, to be sure, but many people are un- aware that they do and are equally unaware of what that worldview is. Along with Socrates, we hold that an unexamined life is not worth living. Accordingly, we also insist that an unexamined, unconscious worldview is not worth embracing.13 One of the central goals in Christian phi- losophy is to encourage a conscious, in-depth examination of one's worldview. We are convinced that we need not remain unconscious of our worldview, unaware of what our primary heart commitments are and how they direct our lives. 1.2.2.5 Consistent or inconsistent. Fifth, Sire insists that many people hold inconsistent worldviews; their fimdamental presuppositions simply do not fit together logically. Another purpose of Christian philosophy is to develop a consistent worldview by identifying and eliminating logical inconsistencies. 1.2.2.6 Ultimate reality. Sixth, Sire explains that a central component of worldview is one's perspective on "the basic constitution of reality:' The core of a worldview is one's understanding of what constitutes the "really real:' For a Christian, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is ultimate reality. For a Muslim, Allah the Merciful and Almighty is ultimate reality For some Buddhists, nirvana is the really real, in con- trast to the desires and trials of this life, which are transitory and ulti- mately empty. For some Hindus, Brahman (an infinite, impersonal transcendent reality) is ultimate reality. For a materialist (atheist), the physical cosmos is the only really real. For a New Age spiritualist, the ' 2Randy W. Nelson, "What Is a Worldview?; in Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart, ed. Douglas S. Huffman (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 30. "Sadly, I cannot take credit for this adaptation of Socratic wisdom. A similarversion can be found in Norman L. Geisler and William D. Watkins, Worlds Apart: A Handbook on World Views, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1989), 9. "Socrates said, 'The unexamined life is not worth living? And the unexamined world view is not worth living by?' r6 PART I-Introducing Woridview divine self is ultimate reality, or at least a part of ultimate reality. One's worldview, whether in propositional or narrative form, is centered on an understood or implied foundational reality. L2.2.7Life-directing. Finally, Sire notes that our worldview directs our life path by providing the foundation on which "we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). Naugle points out that worldview, as a deep-seated commitment of the heart, is a motivating factor in how we live. In the first place, our cultural and contextual circumstances help shape our worldview: "Into the heart go the issues of life.... The life- shaping content of the heart is determined not only by nature or organic predispositions, but very much by nurtur&"4 Our worldview then pro- ceeds to shape our experience of life and our daily motivation and di- rection: "Out of the heart go the issues of life. Once the heart of an indi- vidual is formed by the powerful forces of both nature and nurture, it constitutes the presuppositional basis of life:' The heart, the individual's worldview, is first affected by conditions and influences; in turn it influ- ences the direction of the individual's life. Naugle identifies this interplay between one's worldview and context: "Hence the sum and substance of the heart,... in short, what I am calling a `worldview; sustains an inter- active or reciprocal relationship with the external world:'1s A person's worldview is developed during that person's formative years, influenced and instilled by a myriad of sociocultural forces. But woridview, once in place, becomes a fundamental heart commitment, directing one's life choices and values. Worldview beliefs, whether conscious or uncon- scious, serve as presuppositions on which the rest of life is based. In summary, Sire's definition of worldview helps us grasp the strongly internal and pretheoretical nature of worldview. He points out that worldviews contain a mixture of truth and error and can be held with relative degrees of consciousness and consistency. Finally, worldview centers on a fundamental understanding of prime reality and gives di- rection to our life choices. "Naugle, Worldview, 270-71. Naugle cites religion, culture, economic situation, friendships, mar- riage, family, education, work, sexual experiences, and warfare as some of the many factors that shape an individual's worldview at the heart level. "Ibid. (emphasis original). CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 17 James Olthuis provides a complementary definition of worldview. A worldview (or vision of life) is a framework or set of fundamental beliefs through which we view the world and our calling and future in it. This vision maybe so internalized that it goes largely unquestioned; it may be greatly refined through cultural-historical development; it may not be explicitly developed into a systematic conception of life; it may not be theoretically deepened into a philosophy; it may not even be codified into creedal form. Nevertheless, this vision is a channel for the ultimate beliefs which give di- rection and meaning to life. It is the integrative and interpretative framework by which order and disorder are judged, the standard by which reality is managed and pursued. It is the set of hinges on which all our everyday thinking and doing turns16 Several pages ago, we provisionally defined worldview as the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and interpret the world and our place within it. We will maintain that definition and use it going forward, as it concisely encapsulates the nature and scope of worldview. However, our concise definition should be understood within the enriching context provided by Sire and Olthuis. REFLECTION QIIESTIONS 1 How would you define worldview in your own words? Why provide that definition? 2 What do you think of the authors' claim that worldview is formed pretheoretically? 3 Which aspect of James Sire's expanded definition of worldview was the most helpful to you? Why? 1.3 COMPONENTS OF WORLDVIEW Philosophers, educators, sociologists, missiologists, and anthropologists alike can agree that worldview is an important concept to understand and apply. Furthermore, scholars in each discipline agree that there is an identifiable set of common components to worldview. Scholars differ, 16James H. Olthuis, "On Worldviews;' Christian Scholar's Review 14, no. 2 (1985):155. r8 PART I-Introducing Worldview however, in regard to what those common components actually are. Their differences are sometimes related to their respective fields of study. Thus, for example, philosopher James Sire identifies classical philo- sophical questions as the common components of worldview" Anthro- pologist Michael Kearney, on the other hand, highlights identification of the self and the other and sociological relationships's Scholars also differ in terms of how worldview components ought to be identified. Some scholars propose categories of thought or belief as the common compo- nents to worldview. Other scholars suggest that all worldviews address a set of unavoidable common questions. For our part, we believe that it is best to approach universal worldview components with four core questions in mind: What is our nature? What is our world? What is our problem? What is our end? On one hand, asking such questions helps to bring worldview commitments to the surface in a way that categories or classifications may not; the route of questioning embodies the still-valuable Socratic method of philo- sophical inquiry. On the other hand, it also seems to us that approaching worldviews via questions is more attuned to the predominantly storied or narrative structure of worldview. Thus, we believe that our worldview— conscious or not, consistent or not—answers four fundamental ques- tions (actually, four sets of questions) about life, the universe, and every- thing. Each question (or set of questions) has multiple possible answers that can be given in the form of stories or propositions; together, the answers compose a comprehensive view of reality. The questions posed for and answered by every worldview have been asked by thinking persons for millennia. A quick word of warning is in order, however. The way that we present these questions makes them seem independent of one another. In reality, this is far from the case. None of the questions exists in isolation. Like most questions and answers in philosophy and in life in general, these questions are intricately intertwined and interrelated. Answers to the first question have grave implications for the remaining questions; an- swers to the second question often entail necessary responses to other "Sire, Universe Next Door, 22-23. "Michael Kearney, World Yew (Novato, CA: Chandler & Sharp, 1984), 68-98. CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview7 19 questions, and so forth. Hence, one's worldview contains a holistic, wrapped-up-together set of answers to all the worldview questions. 1.3.1 What is our nature? We begin here because this is where thinking, reflective human beings begin. The question, what is our nature?, may not have logical priority, but it does have chronological and existential priority" In order to ask questions about our place in the universe or the existence (or lack thereof) of a deity, one needs first to exist as a rational, reflective agent. I ask questions about my own nature and composition before asking questions about other human beings or a hypothetical deity When I eventually ask questions about other human beings and God, I may refine or alter my understanding of who/what I am, but this does not change the fact that I ask the existential questions first. Thus, the first necessary component of worldview involves questions regarding the nature of the self, the human being. What is our nature? Who am I? What does it mean to be human? What distinguishes me from other living creatures? Are we the product of random mutation and natural selection? Are we the handiwork of a divine Creator? Are we purely physical, material beings? Do we have an immaterial soul or spirit as well? Do we have free will, or are our actions determined by our biochemistry? 1.3.2 What is our world? When a newborn baby is unceremoniously expelled from the warm comfort of the mother's womb, I can almost hear the unexpressed words in the baby's plaintive cry: Where am I? What is the nature of this strange, cold, and bright environment? As that infant grows and is nurtured, the child gains and develops an understanding of the external world. What is our world? What is the nature and character of the physical world? Is the physical world ordered or chaotic? Is it a closed system (deter- ministic) or an open system (orderable by free-willed creatures)? Is matter eternal and uncreated, divine and coeternal with deity, or temporal and created? Answering the question, what is our world?, involves an under- standing of cosmology—the nature of the world. Our worldview, however, does not stop there. In answering this question, worldview proceeds to ask "that is, this question may not be the most important question (logical priority), but it is the first one we ask (chronological/existential priority). 20 PART I-Introducing Woridview w SGtNIC questions in the realm of phi- VIEW losophy of religion and theology. Contemporary Cultural What is fundamental reality or Woridview Meditation ultimate reality? Is the universe all Star Wars and the that is, all that ever was, and all Woridview Questions that ever will be? Or is there a su- Consider the worldview exemplified in the pernatural reality? Is this simply a original Star Wars trilogy (now episodes 4-6). physical universe, or is it a uni- Whatisournature?On an individual level, verse charged with the grandeur Luke Skywalker's identity and nature present a of God? If God exists, what is God pressing question throughout the trilogy: he is a Jedi prodigy, the one destined to triumph like? Personal or impersonal? over the Sith Lord. On a global level, human Unitary or triune? If God does not beings are portrayed as merely one among a exist, what is ultimate reality? myriad of intelligent beings inhabiting a vast Note the inevitable relationship universe filled with sentient life. between this question and the pre- What is our world? Again, we are part of a vious one. If ultimate reality is the massive universe where science and physical universe, and there is technology reign. There are no references to spiritual beings or divine entities, only the nothing beyond it, then of necessity ubiquitous midichlorians (though we don't human beings are strictly physical find out that they are midichlorians until the creatures. If there is no spiritual or release of episode 1), which govern the balance nonphysical side to the cosmos, of the universe. there cannot be a spiritual or soul- What is our problem?The Force is currently ish side to human beings either. imbalanced by the domination of the emperor 1.3.3 What is our problem? The and his Sith partner, Darth Vader. The Empire is oppressive and suppressing, seeking to stamp newborn infant experiences the out independent free-minded peoples external world as a place of dis- throughout the universe, particularly through comfort. Warmth and security the use of their weapon of mass destruction, have been shattered by a forced the Death Star. move into a colder, insecure world. What is our end?The purpose of humanity The child cannot help but ask, (actually, of sentient life) is somewhat unclear what's wrong? One constant feature in the Star Wars films. Perhaps it is maintaining and living within the balance of the Force. of human thought and civilization Perhaps it is freedom from any autocratic has been the unshakable im- government. Perhaps it is finding fulfillment in pression that something is amiss in love or personal accomplishments. the human universe. CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 21 Thus, we ask, What is our problem? What is wrong with us as human beings, and how can it be solved? What is wrong with the world, and how can it be solved? Every person and every worldview acknowledges that there is something wrong with both the world and with each person as an individual in the world. Things are not the way they ought to be. What is wrong with all human beings? Is it sinful rebellion against our Divine Maker? Is it ignorance, religious superstition, or lack of education? Is it the illusion of personal desires? Is it corrupting social, political, and eco- nomic structures? Furthermore, after identifying the problem, how can we go about fixing it? 1.3.4 What is our end? The Greek word telos carries connota- (teaoc) tions of purpose, end, goal, and destination. This final worldview question is best understood in the multifaceted light of telos. What is our end? Worldview addresses our origins: What is our nature as human beings, and where did we come from? Worldview must also address our end: Where are we going? Is there any meaning and purpose in life, or are we random creatures in a purposeless, meaningless uni- verse? Do we create our own purpose and meaning? Or do we rightly seek to fulfill some purpose for which we were created? In addition to questions of meaning and purpose in this life, human beings also ponder their postmortem fate. What happens to us after we die? Is physical death the end of human existence? Are we absorbed into an infinite, impersonal ultimate reality? Are we judged at the throne of God Almighty for an eternity with him in heaven or an eternity without him in hell? The answers we give to these four worldview questions compose our worldview. REFLECTION QUESTIONS 1 Why do the authors approach worldview through core questions? Do you think it's a valuable approach? Why or why not? 2 Think of a neighbor/friend who has different fundamental beliefs from yours. How do you think he or she might answer the four worldview questions? 3 Can you think of a worldview that does not acknowledge a problem with us or our world? 22 PART I-Introducing Worldview 1.4 THE UNIVERSALITY AND DIVERSITY OF WORLDVIEW Worldview is the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and interpret the world and our place within it. Worldview develops in and flows through the heart, the center of the human person, and nec- essarily involves answers (propositional or narrative) to four sets of questions: What is our nature? What is our world? What is our problem? What is our end? Furthermore, a worldview is a person-specific matrix—a perception of reality, a filter through which everything flows as we seek to make sense of external data. The answers, conscious or unconscious, consistent or inconsistent, to the four governing ques- tions constitute one's fundamental worldview. Each person has an answer to the four sets of questions, even if the person has never formed them into intelligible propositions or coherent narratives. Whether one looks at worldview as a set of beliefs about the structure of the world, an internal framework, or a set of glasses through which we look at reality, the bottom line is that every person possesses a worldview. We may not like it; we might deny it. We might insist that worldview is not even a rational concept. But that does not change the fact that each of us has a worldview and that one's worldview strongly affects the way that one lives. Because everybody has a worldview, there are literally countless worldviews held by people across the globe. Each worldview is unique to its owner. No two people have precisely identical worldviews. Con- sider, for example, possible answers to the second worldview question, what is our world? Christians are going to answer that question with the same general answer: God's. This is my Father's world; the universe is created by and for God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To this point, Christians will universally agree. But if we delve deeper, there is much more to explore. For example, what else can we say about the God who created the universe? Some philosophers and theologians argue that we cannot say much else because God is utterly transcendent and beyond our knowledge, definition, and comprehension. Others insist that we can and should seek to understand God and that we can indeed come to know God truly CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 2$ (although not exhaustively). They might argue, for example, that God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Imagine that we agree that God is omnipotent. Well then, what does omnipotence mean? Can God do literally anything? William of Ockham and others insist that yes, God can do literally anything. Thomas Aquinas and others insist that no, God cannot do some things. God cannot lie, because to do so would be to violate his very nature. How about God's omnibenevolence, or all-goodness? How can we work that out? If God is all good, where does evil come from? Is evil, as Augustine argued, the absence of goodness that occurs when God's crea- tures fail to practice his goodness in their lives? Does evil result strictly from the sinful rebellion of man? Does God desire evil to exist in order to bring greater glory to himself through redemption? Christians have differences in these areas. How about God's omniscience, or all-knowingness? Most Christians affirm that God knows all things, including future actions that human beings, as free-willed creatures, have not even chosen to do yet. How can this be? Augustine and Boethius argue that God exists outside of time and space, such that he experiences what is future to us as already present to himself. Thus, our future free actions are already seen by God and enable his eternally present knowledge of those events. God sees our future in the same way that we see our present. Others, including Bruce Ware, argue that God's knowledge of the future is grounded in his me- ticulous sovereignty, whereby he not only foreknows but foreordains what is yet to comet° God knows future actions because God determines what those actions shall be. Or, consider another aspect of the second worldview question from a Christian perspective. What is the nature of reality? Christians generally agree that God has created all that is. After that, agreement can break down. Did God create the universe and everything within it a very short time ago, less than ten thousand years ago? Or did God create the uni- verse a very long time ago, perhaps fourteen billion years ago? 'OE.g., Bruce A. Ware, God's Greater Glory: The Exalted God of Scripture (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 35-160. 24 PART I-Introducing Woridview The point here is not to engage in discussion or debate about these issues; rather, the point is simply to demonstrate that within one broad worldview perspective (that of orthodox Christian theism), there exists a wide variety of ways to work out the answers to worldview questions. The moral of the story is simply that each person possesses a woridview that is entirely unique to that person. No two Christians are going to have precisely identical worldviews. This creates somewhat of a tension within worldview thinking. On the one hand, there is such a thing as a Christian worldview—propositions, answers, or narratives that are common to all Christians at all times in all places. Baptist, Pentecostal, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox Christians will affirm the overarching narrative of creation-fall-redemption: God created, humanity is fallen, and Jesus saves. On the other hand, Christian traditions nuance those worldview beliefs and work out other aspects of worldview differently. Examination of individual Christian believers reveals a great deal of diversity. Simply put, different Christians possess different manifestations of the Christian worldview. Despite the differences, however, there is such a thing as an overarching Christian worldview. In some ways, this diversity in the midst of unity should not surprise us; this is just one version of the classic philosophical problem of the one and the many. For example, a typical college classroom is filled with perhaps two dozen human beings; yet each student is a different and unique ex- ample or manifestation of humanness. We all share certain essential or nonnegotiable characteristics or properties that make us uniformly human. Yet we each have other, more incidental or accidental, characteristics or properties that make us a uniquely instantiated human being. The same is true with respect to worldviews. There are certain essential characteristics to a uniformly Christian worldview, yet there are also numerous secondary characteristics that mark a uniquely fleshed-out Christian worldview. Thus, the fact that everybody has a unique individual worldview does not prevent us from identifying a more limited number of overarching worldviews. Often these broad worldviews will be defined as philosophical systems or as religious worldviews. Some of the key worldviews prevalent in the world today include Christianity, Islam, Judaism, naturalism (athe- istic modernity), existentialism, Buddhism, Hinduism, animism, NewAge CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 25 spirituality, and postmodernism. These overarching worldviews provide different large-picture answers to the fundamental worldview questions. For example, a naturalistic (or atheistic) worldview claims that there is no God, the universe sprang into existence with no explanation (or else has existed eternally), life arose on primordial earth through random chemical reactions, and human life evolved through random mutation and natural selection. There is nothing particularly special about human beings com- pared to the rest of nature, and our primary problem is enslavement to superstitious worldviews that promote religious belief. The solution to the problem is intellectual evolution and liberation from religious oppression. After we die, we entirely cease to be, so whatever purpose we choose to pursue for our lives is the only purpose and meaning there can be. The Christian worldview has substantially different answers. In the beginning was God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All that is was created by him out of nothingness; at its creation, everything was de- clared good by God. Humankind was created good by God and stamped with his very image. The problems in the world are the result of human- ity's rebellion and fall into sin. Instead of harmony and communion, human beings now experience broken relationships with God, self, fellow human beings, and God's creation. God provides the means for redemption through the atoning death of Jesus; broken relationships can be healed and reconciled in Christ. After death, all human beings are judged on the basis of their relationship with God in Christ; believers experience eternal life in the presence of God. STUP & PAUSE Biblical Worldview Insight the eye is the lamp of the body If your eyes are healthy $jour ;hole body will be full of light, But if your eyes are unhealthy your whole body will :be full of darkness. If then the light'within you is'darkness, howgteat is that darkness! (Mt 6:22-23) " in`the,context of the Sermon on the Mould Jesus is insisting that one must choose between the things of heaven and the things of earth—the kingdom of heaven (God) and thekingdom of earth (man). Hegoes on toemphasize that`"no,olie;can serve;two.masters','.,(Mt 6:24):. " v 26 PART I-Introducing Worldview Given that, read Jesus' words in Matthew 6:22-23 in the "context =of worldview thought: If your worldview lensesare healthy, yourwholebody will be fullof light. That fs, ifyou"are looking at the wodduorrectly, segiiig, things the way that God sees them, you will live an illuininated, enlighten :inglife: But if your worldview lenses are unhealthy,'your whole.~bodywilf be. full of darkness. When one wears a distorted set of worldview glasses,. s.< nothing looks.right, and life cannot be lived rightly. ;a Check your prescription! Are you wearing the right worldvieW?,Ocdo: you need;new lenses? The differences between the worldview matrices of naturalism and Christianity are significant and greatly affect the way that we perceive the world around us. You can, indeed, say with justification that the Christian theist and the naturalist inhabit different worlds. The con- ceptual lens through which the world is viewed is starkly distinct; thus, what is seen is also quite different. We consider Jesus' words in the Sermon on the Mount, understood through the filter of worldview thought, to be a fitting conclusion to this introductory chapter: The eye [worldview] is the lamp of the body. Ifyour eyes are healthy, your whole bodywill be full of light. But if your eyes are unhealthy, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness! (Mt 6:22-23) REFLECTION QUESTIONS 7 Do differences of opinion between Christians regarding God's om- nipotence, or the way in which God created, have any importance? Why or why not? 2 What would you identify as the essential elements of an over- arching Christian worldview? 3 What are the most prominent or influential worldviews in North America today? In East Asia? 4 What might be some broad differences between Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, and Anglican expressions of Christian worldview? CHAPTER 1—What Is Worldview? 27 MASTERING TILE MATERIAL When you finish reading this chapter, you should be able to ✓ Provide a concise definition of worldview and ✓ Articulate your own response to the explain its contours. worldview questions. ✓ Recount the rising importance of worldview ✓ Differentiate shared contours ofan overarching thought, especially in Western philosophy. Christian woddview and denominational/ ✓ Identify the four core woridview questions individual elements of personal Christian and their subquestions. worldview. Glossary of Terms for Chapter One cultural anthropology—A nearly inde- presupposition—A belief that is assumed pendent branch of anthropology that before any argument is made for or against it. focuses on the study of cultural variations pretheoretical—something that arises before among the human race. any theoretical considerations. inconsistent worldview—A worldview propositional format—When something is whose fundamental presuppositions do not presented in propositional format, it becomes fit together logically. a list of main points or events ratherthan a missiology—Area of practical theology that narrative or story. focuses on the mission, mandate, and Weltanschauung—German word meaning message of the church. "worldview"or outlook" narrative format—When something is told in worldview—the conceptual lens through narrative format, it takes on the framework which we see, understand, and interpret the of a story ratherthan a list of events. world and our place within it. Possible Term Paper Topics ✓ Trace the development of worldview thought ✓ Choose one of the core attributes of God from Kant to Kuyper. (omnipresence, omnipotence, omnibe- ✓ Investigate the formative/transformative nevolence, omniscience). Research how power ofstory as it relates to worldview. various theologians and philosophers have understood that attribute. Articulate and ✓ Choose a prominent Christian thinker and, defend your own position. using that person's writings (or words), recon- struct his or her worldview at a precise level. 28 PART I-Introducing Worldview Core Bibliography for Chapter One Goheen, Michael W., and Craig G. Bartholomew. Sire, James W. The Universe NextDoor.:ABask Living atthe Crossroads: An Introduction to Worldview Catalog. 5th ed. Downers Grove, IL: Christian Worldview. Grand Rapids: Baker IVP Academic 2009. Academic, 2008. Walsh, Brian J., and J. Richard Middleton. The Naugle, David K. Worldview: TheNistoryofa Transforming trsion:5haping a Christian Concept. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,2002. Worldview. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic 1984.