Assessment T1 CW

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

e of the God or gods at the center of a theistic worldview profoundly affects the larger worldview. This is especially clear when considering the relationship between the divine being and human beings.

Summary of Worldview Families This section has outlined a few of the major features of three worldview families in order to assist with further investigation of various worldview options. No attempt has been made to fully interact with any particular worldview. Rather, the three families described above are offered as broad categories that derive from fundamental convictions about the nature of ultimate reality. Generally speaking, an atheistic worldview entails disbelief in the existence of a god or gods. By contrast, a pantheistic worldview recognizes the divine but envisions it as an impersonal force or principle that cannot be distinguished from the world. Finally, a theistic worldview involves a personal and intelligent being who, typically, has created the universe and thus bears some relation to it.

Two additional observations may be added. In some cases, a particular worldview may tend toward the boundary somewhere in between two of the broad worldview families. Some strands of Buddhism, for example, are consistent in many ways with pantheistic conceptions because they are generally disinterested in knowing or acknowledging the creator. Thus, some have described these understandings as atheistic, or at least nontheistic, because they make little direct reference to God. Similarly, a worldview in which the creator created the universe but then distanced himself relationally from it is, technically, a theistic view. Yet, in practical terms, the existence of God in this view is of little practical importance, so, in practice, it will tend to function in ways that seem more atheistic. Neither of these examples, or others like them, can be categorized easily. Hence, the major categories outlined here provide a useful guide to the investigation of worldviews, but, in the end, they are only a guide.

Finally, it should be noted that many, and perhaps most, individuals hold worldviews that are inconsistent, ill defined, and eclectic. In part, this results from the fact that most people go through life without bringing their fundamental assumptions into their conscious mind for careful examination. It can also result from living in an environment that is characterized by plurality and diversity of thought and behavior. This is increasingly true of life in Western, developed countries, especially in urban contexts. For several reasons that will be addressed below, consistency and clarity of thought are important goals for those who seek wisdom.

Worldview Analysis and Evaluation Worldview analysis begins with an understanding of worldview as a concept, how worldviews function, and the basic elements that make up a worldview. But the practical value of worldview analysis relates chiefly to gaining the ability to recognize and evaluate worldviews. Gaining the skills needed to comprehend and evaluate worldviews is of great

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

consequence because worldviews compete for minds and hearts daily in the marketplace of ideas.

Worldviews are preached continuously in a wide variety of contexts. To offer one example, whenever a person watches a movie, from The Lion King to The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, that individual is confronted with the beliefs and values of those who made the movie. When people enter imaginatively into the fictional worlds that Hollywood presents, they are encouraged to consider life from another's point of view. As a result, individuals sometimes laugh at jokes they would be too embarrassed to repeat, they empathize with immoral behavior, or they begin to ponder whether violence is an appropriate way of solving some problems. Cinema would have only a limited effect if movies directly challenged the core beliefs of those who watch them. But of course, they rarely take that approach. Typically, they present alternative worldviews to audiences without drawing attention to the fact that they are emphasizing ideas and values that stem from a particular vision for the world.

Movies are by no means the only media through which worldviews are disseminated. The nightly news, blogs, advertising, education, and virtually all other modes of human communication serve as avenues for the competition of worldviews. At every point that people communicate, they do so from a particular perspective, and they commend some aspect of their perspective to those who listen. An inability to recognize that this is happening leaves the average listener defenseless. When people are unable to consciously engage ideas in the marketplace, their thoughts and actions are shaped unconsciously by the values and convictions of others.

Worldview Evaluation To be direct, worldviews are not of equal value because they are not all equally true, good, and beautiful. This claim may be shocking to the sensibilities of some, but briefly reflecting on the worldview families described above should make the truth of this assertion plain to the honest reader. Consider carefully the fundamental assumptions made by atheists and theists regarding ultimate reality. If both worldview families were equally true, then one would have to affirm both that God does not exist and that God does exist simultaneously. But what would affirming two mutually exclusive claims even mean? It makes no sense. The same sort of illogical conclusion follows from comparing a pantheistic assumption about an impersonal god with a theistic assumption that God is personal.

It is impossible to conclude logically that two contradictory convictions are true at the same time and in the same way. In such cases, either both views are wrong, or one view is more accurate than the other. It is simply not possible for all views to be equally true. The point is not to demean an individual or mock a particular view of the world. Instead, the goal is merely to underscore that it is important to analyze and evaluate worldview claims thoughtfully because worldviews are not all created equal. Pretending that all views can be true simultaneously may sound polite and politically correct, but it will prove useless for those determined to pursue wisdom.

Testing Worldviews

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

In order to maintain some objectivity in the evaluation of worldviews, it will be important to establish a consistent set of criteria that can be applied in the assessment of worldview assumptions. Numerous standards have been proposed in worldview studies, but three basic areas have emerged as the crucial considerations with which to begin (Naugle, 2002). By testing a worldview in each of these three areas, it becomes possible to identify areas of strength and weakness and to compare competing worldview claims in a balanced way. These areas of examination roughly parallel three leading theories regarding the nature of truth: the coherence theory, the correspondence theory, and the existential theory.

Coherence Test An initial standard for evaluation is the coherence test, which is a worldview test that examines the internal consistency and rational coherence of worldview commitments. This test questions whether the various aspects of a worldview agree with or contradict one another. Careful investigation of a worldview may uncover seemingly contradictory claims that need to be considered more fully. If, after closer examination, it can be determined that critical assumptions within a worldview do not merely appear to contradict but actually do contradict, then good reason exists for regarding the belief system to be false.

When a worldview is determined to be incoherent, it should not be considered true; however, when it is determined that a worldview is coherent, the most that one can reasonably conclude is that the worldview might be true (Samples, 2007). A person may construct an entirely consistent worldview that does not contradict itself, but this is no guarantee that the worldview accurately depicts the real world. A person who is mentally ill, for example, may come to internally consistent conclusions that she is the Duchess of York, but those conclusions do not correspond to the way things are in the world outside of her mind. As important as this test may be, further examination is still necessary to reach a final conclusion.

Failing the Coherence Test

An example of incoherence may be observed in the claim that "There is no such thing as absolute truth." Presumably, this claim attempts to account for the difficulties involved in determining what is true and in convincing others of that truth. Unfortunately, the statement that "There is no such thing as absolute truth" amounts to an absolute claim about what is true, which is precisely what the statement suggests does not exist. It is a self-refuting claim because it turns out to be internally inconsistent. In principle, this sort of coherence should not characterize one's worldview.

Correspondence Test A second standard for evaluation is the correspondence test, which examines a worldview's ability to provide a cogent explanation of reality. This test examines the claims of a worldview to determine whether those claims adequately account for available data and personal experience. If it can be determined that a worldview does not truly fit

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

with reality or that it neglects major aspects of reality, the worldview should not be considered true. It simply does not correspond to the way that things are in the real world. Correspondence may be considered the primary test for any worldview because a worldview that fails to adequately account for reality is not worthy of serious consideration.

Correspondence Test

The statement "It is raining in Moscow" is an example of correspondence. If precipitation is, in fact, currently falling within the capital city of Russia, then this statement corresponds to reality. Thus, it may be considered true. If the statement does not fit the state of affairs in Moscow, then it simply cannot be considered true. In principle, correspondence should be considered the critical test of the truthfulness of one's worldview.

Practical Test A third and final standard for evaluation is the practical test, which examines a worldview's workability and practical value in the most important areas of life and experience. Major issues at this point relate to the implications of a worldview for human happiness, satisfaction, and daily life. If people find their worldview to be lacking in some significant way, as they experience life's challenges, they should look elsewhere for a worldview to which they can commit and with which they can live happily.

While this third test is not the primary test for worldviews, it, nonetheless, represents a critical area of consideration when evaluating worldviews. Generally, people will not continue to live with a worldview once it has become obvious that it is not really satisfactory. They may continue to say that they adhere to the worldview they once held, but they will begin to live in ways that are inconsistent with those convictions. A person's actual beliefs will become increasingly obvious through his or her actions, in spite of his or her stated beliefs. In short, a person who becomes dissatisfied with one worldview will begin to borrow from another. This is often the first sign that a worldview may be inadequate.

Worldviews and Cognitive Dissonance

When a person continues to commit verbally to a particular worldview while acting in a way that is contradictory to it, he or she may begin to experience what can be described as cognitive dissonance. Essentially, this describes the tension and discomfort that arises when a person tries to hold two or more contradictory beliefs or ideas at the same time.

In cases in which individuals know that life cannot be lived in ways that are consistent with specific aspects of their worldview, they may begin to experience mental stress because of the tension they are experiencing between their convictions and their behavior. The individuals may choose to endure the discomfort for a while for various reasons such as peer pressure, shame, or fear.

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

This sort of dissonance, however, can become virtually unbearable; therefore, even though individuals may not believe that their convictions are correct, they may choose to suppress the tension, ignore their conscience, and act in ways they can live with rather than ways that truly align with their worldview commitments.

Conversely, individuals who genuinely believe that their worldview is adequate may still fail to live up to the ideals of that worldview. This seems to complicate matters somewhat, but it represents another consideration. In these cases, the problem may not stem from inadequacies within the worldview but, rather, from inadequacies within the person who embraces it. A clear example appears in the New Testament in the book of 1 John. Here, the author draws attention to the sort of consistency between stated belief and actual belief that should be evident in the ways Christians act toward one another.

If anyone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother. (1 John 4:20–21)

Here, the author is not suggesting that Christianity is somehow inadequate. Rather, he is pointing out the need for Christians to follow Christ more closely at a key point.

Attaining to the Ideals of a Worldview

It is important to consider that, at times, a person who is completely committed to a certain worldview may fall short of living consistently with the values to which he or she truly holds. Consider the woman in the example in Chapter 1. She values each individual life, but when she is under stress while on her drive home after a difficult day, she treats people with disrespect. Does this mean she does not value people? To dig deeper into this topic from the perspective of the Christian worldview, consider Romans 7 and 8. These chapters are helpful in thinking about how a Christian can have perfect intentions and still fall woefully short. A person may err over and over again, doing what he or she did not intend to do or else fail to do what he or she intended to do.

For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me … Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! (Romans 7:14–25)

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh,

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit … Those who are in the flesh cannot please God … Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words … And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:1–8, 8:26, 8:28)

Summary of Worldview Tests For the purpose of objectively evaluating worldviews, three basic worldview tests have been proposed. The coherence test focuses on the internal consistency of a worldview's basic assumptions. Here, the central question is, "Does the worldview make sense?" A second test, the correspondence test, focuses on a worldview's ability to make sense of available data and experience. Here, the question is simple: "Does the worldview correspond to the way things actually are in the world?" Finally, the practical test considers whether a worldview provides a satisfactory basis for human life. The central question here is, "Can one live with this worldview?" Taken together, these three tests offer a helpful starting point for assessing the adequacy of various worldview assumptions.

Bear in mind that these tests will be of little value if they are applied to living worldviews and the people who hold them in harsh or simplistic ways. They are not designed for use as weapons to attack others or embarrass them. Instead, they are intended for use in gently and objectively engaging real people who hold deep convictions about the world. As such, they cannot be applied well if one does not attempt to listen carefully to others' views and to their rationale for holding those views. Because this task should also involve self-assessment, it will be important for every individual to consider how he or she hopes to be treated by others. As a general rule, whatever is undesirable for oneself is probably undesirable for others as well.

At this point, the New Testament book of James offers practical wisdom that may be of value in the challenging task of analyzing and evaluating worldviews. James writes, "Let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, [and] slow to anger" (James 1:19). This author was not speaking directly about worldview studies, but his timeless instructions for engaging others remain sound advice for people living today.

Conclusion The ability to analyze and evaluate worldviews will pay practical dividends for those who learn to recognize, understand, and evaluate worldview claims. When others communicate their views explicitly or implicitly, they are vying for the attention and acceptance of all who listen. People normally do not accept an entire set of worldview assumptions from

2504743 - Grand Canyon University ©

another person after a brief conversation. More commonly, persuasive appeals to the mind and heart shape the convictions of an audience little by little over time.

When such appeals lead toward truth, goodness, and beauty, it is altogether appropriate to refine one's worldview in order to make progress toward wisdom; however, when these appeals are rooted in falsehood, tainted morally, or deformed in some way, it is critical for listeners to recognize danger and reject the appeal. Those who are aware that worldviews are in play and who are capable of evaluating others' claims will find themselves in the best position to discern how to respond wisely in each situation.

Religious people are not alone in forming beliefs about the nature of the world in which they live. All people, at all times, and in all places have developed foundational understandings concerning the nature of the universe and have built their lives, consciously or unconsciously, upon those understandings. Moreover, worldviews are not all equally true, and, therefore, they do not all provide adequate foundations upon which to construct a life. In the end, everyone trusts in something. The vital question is not, "Who is trusting in something?" but, rather, "Who is trusting in something trustworthy?" This question will be engaged more fully in the chapters that follow.

Capter Review Main Ideas

Worldview commitments often are he