Personal Commitments Assessment

By Jason Hiles and Anna Faith Smith

Chapter 2: Evaluating Wisely

The Beginning of Wisdom An Introduction to

Christian Thought and Life

Print Chapter 

CHAPTER 2CHAPTER 2

TOPICS Introduction

Worldviews in Competition

Is It Possible to Evaluate Worldviews Fairly?

Elements of a Worldview

Major Worldview Families

Worldview Analysis and Evaluation

Testing Worldviews

Conclusion

Chapter Review

References

Introduction Shortly after beginning to study worldviews, the

careful student will realize that everyone has a

worldview, and everything that humans think, say,

and do flows out of an overarching vision of the

world. This includes the text on this page, the

chapter in which the page is found, and the larger

book of which it is a part. Similarly, the person who

takes up the subject, reads this book, and begins to

interact with the ideas found here is doing all these

things on the basis of fundamental assumptions that

shape understandings and responses. Simple

decisions such as accepting or rejecting statements

and concepts that arise during the course of study

occur with reference to personal convictions that

are rooted deeply in a particular worldview. In

short, the fact that everyone has a worldview means

that no one thinks, speaks, or acts in ways that are

entirely neutral. Rather, all live in ways that are

committed to deeply held understandings and

convictions.

Worldviews in Competition People tend to hold their worldview commitments

with what may be called universal intent, meaning

they do not think of their deepest convictions as

merely applying to themselves in a personal and

private way. These convictions surface when people

interact with one another and the universal intent

with which they hold their beliefs becomes obvious.

This happens particularly when disagreements

arise. For example, when a person tries to cut in line

at a store’s checkout counter, people in the back of

the line do not normally react as if their views about

the matter are personal and private. Typically, they

feel some urge to react negatively as if a universal

rule has been broken. Some will roll their eyes,

others will quietly murmur, and a few will verbally

confront the individual who cut in line. However, no

one believes that his or her convictions about such

things only apply to the individual who holds them.

The same sort of response may be observed in a

variety of other situations involving injustice or

inappropriate conduct. Those who witness unjust

behavior tend to react as if others should recognize

that the behavior is unjust and that the offender

should behave differently. Even those who claim

that tolerance and acceptance must prevail at all

points tend to become intolerant and unaccepting

when others disagree. Simply stated, human action

speaks louder than words on this matter. Everyone

has a worldview and people tend to hold their

personal worldview as if they expect others’ actions

to align with their personal convictions at

significant points.

To press this point a little further, note that

worldviews compete in the marketplace of ideas

daily. Moreover, those who speak into this

marketplace do so because they intend to persuade

others to embrace a particular understanding or

value and align their thoughts and actions

accordingly. Worldview commitments are

commended through social media, cinema, music,

newspapers, blogs, commercial advertising, talk

radio, and so forth. Entire generations have been

shaped by the power of television, movies, and the

Internet because these formats for communication

engage the senses powerfully at moments when

intellectual defenses have been lowered for the

sake of enjoying entertainment. Many drink deeply

from the fountain of popular culture without

consciously realizing that their values are being

shaped by others’ views.

The crucial question this chapter takes up, then, is

not “Who has a worldview?” but rather “How can

one investigate and evaluate worldview

assumptions?” Because everyone has a worldview

and worldview assumptions shape human

interaction on a daily basis, developing the ability to

recognize these assumptions and critically engage

them is essential to living an examined life. This

ability represents an important first step toward

gaining self-awareness, self-understanding, and the

capacity for self-examination. That said, worldviews

frequently result in disagreement about particular

issues, but it will be more important from the start

to delve more deeply into the underlying

commitments that fuel disagreement. This will

require some consideration of the basic elements of

a worldview and an attempt to establish criteria for

assessing worldview commitment. While

assessment is never entirely neutral, it is important

to set forth some objective standards for analyzing

fundamental worldview claims.

Is It Possible to Evaluate Worldviews Fairly? In order to make progress toward wisdom, one must

come to terms with the reality that worldviews

shape every individual, including oneself, and the

communities that individuals form. Although no one

is entirely neutral, to a large degree, objectivity is

possible. Neutrality normally is conceived of as a

state in which a person is completely undecided

about key issues, holds no convictions, and is

unwilling to support any side in a conflict or

disagreement. While this may be an ideal position

for a referee at a sporting event or a judge who

oversees traffic court, it is not a position that any

human can presume to hold when it comes to

worldviews. Some claim to be profoundly neutral

but their style of life always betrays the fact that

they live in ways that are very much committed in

particular directions because of assumptions they

hold at the deepest levels.

Objectivity, on the other hand, represents a goal

that, to some degree, is attainable. It relates to

fairness, evenhandedness, and an open mind that

attempts to gain understanding of others’ views

prior to assessment. Making progress toward

objectivity requires a willingness to listen carefully,

an ability to suppress personal biases and

prejudices, and a concern for justice. It is possible to

become increasingly objective even though it is not

possible to be entirely neutral. For example, a

person who does not believe that God exists is not

neutral at all with respect to this central worldview

assumption. The same person, however, may believe

that humans who believe in God should be free to

gather each week in order to worship him. This

person is not neutral with respect to worldview

commitments, but he or she remains objective

enough to recognize that those who disagree should

be granted the freedom to assemble and other

freedoms necessary to live out their convictions.

This sort of objectivity is absolutely essential for

productive dialogue about worldviews in spite of

personal worldview commitments. Open-

mindedness does not necessarily require that

everyone involved in a conversation agree in the

end; however, it does require care in listening to

others when they express their views along with

concern for their welfare and fair treatment.

Most people are not aware that they have deep

underlying convictions until they are challenged in

some way by someone whose assumptions differ

from their own. Worldviews can be challenged in a

variety of ways within social contexts. When one

recognizes that a conversation partner is speaking

based on convictions that differ substantially from

one's own, he or she must choose whether to accept

those convictions and their implications. In order to

make wise decisions in these cases, a measure of

knowledge and practical skill is necessary.

Elements of a Worldview As noted in Chapter 1, worldviews begin to take

shape from birth. Humans invariably begin the

process of understanding themselves, other

humans, and the world they inhabit upon entering

the world. Understandings grow and take shape as

people experience more of the world and reflect

upon it. Of course, humanity as a whole is incredibly

diverse in many ways. But in some ways humans

exhibit a remarkable degree of similarity when it

comes to basic experience and shared concern. For

example, humans in all cultures living at all times

have found it necessary to survive within a physical

environment by securing food, shelter, and clothing.

They have elected to do so, presumably, because

they believe that self-preservation is of value. The

fact that humans as a species have continued to

survive throughout the centuries suggests that they

also share a concern to preserve and perpetuate the

larger race.

Men and women throughout the ages and across

cultures have given expression to these basic

concerns in various ways. Sometimes they are

expressed in story or through artistic forms such as

poetry, sculpture, or dance. At other times they are

communicated more formally in a series of

propositional statements that are carefully

articulated as a philosophy, a theology, or an ethical

system. One way or the other, when humans give

expression to these timeless concerns, they are also

giving expression to the fundamental elements that

make up a worldview. This section outlines major

categories of concern and the basic elements that

make up a worldview. In this chapter, these

elements are expressed primarily as propositions

for the sake of clarity and focused analysis. As these

elements are unpacked throughout the remainder

of the book it should become clearer that they could

be expressed in several other ways as well.

Ultimate Reality Arguably the most fundamental and definitive of all

worldview commitments relates to the nature of

ultimate reality. Ultimate reality refers to the

absolute, supreme, and final person, power,

principle, or substance underlying the universe.

Conceptions of ultimate reality vary widely, but

there are three fundamental ways of defining what

is ultimately real:

1. A personal god or gods

2. An impersonal force or principle

3. Nothing exists beyond the present space-

matter-time-energy continuum

Historically, as men and women have contemplated

themselves and the world in which they live, they

have raised a profound question: What is ultimately

real? This question appears to stem from a nearly

universal concern to understand the nature of the

universe at the deepest levels. Even when an

individual concludes that the physical universe is

real, he has not settled questions about reality

beyond what can be perceived through the senses.

Raising the question of ultimate reality is like asking

if God exists. If a person concludes that something

or someone exists beyond the physical universe,

that person’s view of the world will be shaped

deeply by that conclusion. Similarly, although in

opposite ways, a person’s view of the world will be

shaped deeply if she concludes that nothing exists

beyond the present space-matter-time-energy

continuum that may be observed through the

senses.

Basic answers to the question of ultimate reality fall

into three major categories that give shape to what

will be described below as worldview families. At

this point, it will be necessary to only outline the

major options for responding to questions about the

nature of ultimate reality. Essentially, a person may

assume that nothing exists beyond the physical

world. Another person may assume that something

exists beyond the physical world as a spiritual

reality, but that “something” is not personal or

relational. Rather, it is a pervasive force or spiritual

essence that pervades the universe. Finally, an

individual may believe that something, or rather,

someone who is personal exists beyond the physical

world. The precise nature of this divine being, or

multiple beings in some cases, varies widely from

worldview to worldview.

Each of these basic assumptions must be fleshed out

extensively within the context of a particular

worldview. An individual who believes in a personal

divine being must also consider whether that being

is singular or plural, benevolent or evil, similar to

humans or altogether different, finite or infinite,

and how that divine being relates to human beings if

at all. No matter what one believes about the nature

of ultimate reality, it is important to note that the

implications of this fundamental worldview

commitment are significant because they

substantially shape all the other elements of a

worldview. Questions about human nature and

purpose, for instance, are intimately connected to

this element.

Nature of the Universe A second major element of worldviews stems from

questions about the world that humans inhabit.

Here, the focus is on the known universe and the

investigation of its nature, but understandings at

this point overlap significantly with conceptions of

ultimate reality. Simply stated, understandings

about the relationship between the physical

universe and ultimate reality deeply shape

convictions about the nature and purpose of the

world. Essentially, human beings must answer the

question: What is the nature of the universe and

how does it relate to whatever is ultimately real?

Several related questions may be raised as well. Is

the origin of the universe natural or supernatural?

And, why does the universe seem to be orderly

rather than chaotic?

Also, it is important to consider whether the

universe is a closed system or an open system that

can be influenced significantly by the spiritual

world? One possible response envisions a world

that is merely physical in the sense that nothing

exists beyond the material universe. In this view,

the universe is conceived as a closed system that

cannot be influenced by external forces or factors

because nothing external to the system exists. This

perspective leaves no room for miracles, angelic

activity, or divine intervention.

By contrast one may conceive of the universe as a

system that is open to spiritual influence. This view

more naturally lends itself to an understanding of

the universe in which God and other spiritual beings

can play a decisive role in the world and in human

affairs. This view also raises further questions

about the nature of spiritual beings and their

intentions in influencing worldly affairs. On either

view, it is not difficult to see how one’s answer to

this question relates to assumptions about ultimate

reality.

Human Nature A third major element of any worldview relates to

questions about what it means to be human. Here,

one may question what humans are made of (bodies,

souls, or a body-soul complex), how they relate to

the physical universe, and how they relate to the

spiritual world if any such thing exists. These

questions may also reach backward by considering

origins or focus on the present by considering

purpose. Similarly, they may look forward to the

future by considering destiny.

When reflecting on issues related to humanity, it

quickly becomes obvious that one’s fundamental

convictions about ultimate reality bear directly on

concerns about human origins, purpose, and

destiny. To offer one example, in the absence of a

personal, divine creator, an individual must account

for human origins in a way that focuses on the

natural world. Some who deny the existence of a

divine creator have attempted to explain humans as

the product of chance and blind forces within the

natural world. According to this view, humans have

not been created purposefully and, therefore,

cannot hope to discover purpose within the natural

order. Instead, men and women must create

purpose for themselves and decide what that

purpose should entail. Ultimately, then, humans

need to fulfill the purpose they have devised within

their lifetimes because they cease to exist when

their physical bodies expire. In such cases, a

consistent explanation of ultimate reality and

human origins, purpose, and destiny must be

confined to the physical universe.

By contrast, a worldview that makes reference to a

god may trace human origins to a personal creator

who designed humans for specific purposes. These

purposes vary widely depending on one’s

understanding of the creator’s nature and purpose.

But, again, assumptions about the existence and

nature of the creator will be closely connected to

assumptions about human origins and purpose. This

type of worldview may also involve the possibility of

life after death as well as reward or punishment,

depending on how individuals respond to the

creator’s purposes. In such cases, the prospect of

reward and punishment tends to guide ethical

reasoning. Typically, those who believe that a

personal divine being exists conceive of human

nature and purpose with direct reference to that

being’s design and final assessment of individual

lives after death.

Knowledge A fourth major worldview element relates to the

nature of knowledge, reliable sources of knowledge,

and the limitations of knowledge. Here, central

issues that must be addressed involve questions

about what genuinely constitutes knowledge, which

sources of knowledge are trustworthy, and what

can be known. Major questions that arise in

connection with this element include:

What is truth?

Which sources of knowledge, if any, are

reliable?

What roles do the five senses, memory,

introspection, and reason play in the

acquisition of knowledge?

Are faith and reason compatible?

Can anyone know truth in an absolute and

objective way?

A great deal is at stake in answering questions

about knowledge because the way people answer

them determines which data they regard as

plausible and, to some extent, how they interpret

that data.

Significant attention has been focused on these

issues throughout the modern era because of an

increased emphasis on rational thought and

scientific observation. This has also resulted from

growing skepticism about the certainty of

knowledge in general and increased doubts about

the reliability of religious knowledge such as divine

revelation. Divine revelation refers to the notion

that God has made himself known, or revealed

himself, to human beings. If God truly has

communicated to humans, then what he has made

known bears more authority than merely human

ideas and opinions. If, however, God has not made

himself known in any way, then humans enjoy

significant authority because the intellectual

prowess of other living creatures pales in

comparison with that of Homo sapiens. But

challenges seem to arise at every point in which

humans differ in opinion and no obvious reason is

available for viewing one opinion to be superior to

others.

As with other major worldview elements,

convictions about knowledge vary depending on

assumptions about ultimate reality, the universe,

and humanity. For instance, answers to the question

“Is belief in God rational?” will differ significantly

depending on convictions about the nature of

ultimate reality. If an individual does not believe

that God exists, it is unlikely that the individual will

believe that divine revelation is possible. As will

become obvious in subsequent chapters, the

Christian worldview entails the convictions that

God exists, that he is capable of communication, and

that he has spoken clearly through the Bible

because he desires to make himself known to

human beings and to be known by them.

At times, the authority and reliability of the Bible is

dismissed outright by those who do not embrace

the Christian worldview before they consider its

claims first hand. While some suggest that this is a

rational response to the Christian Scriptures, it is

difficult to understand how dismissive attitudes

toward the Bible can be rational in cases in which

opinions are poorly informed. Dismissing a text that

has proven foundational to Western civilization and

widely read by intelligent men and women for

centuries suggests that some such decisions are

rooted in worldview assumptions rather than any

inadequacies within the Bible per se. In other

words, what one counts as knowledge and what one

discounts will depend significantly on one’s

overarching view of the world.

Convictions about legitimate types and sources are

central to what can be called a plausibility

structure. A plausibility structure is a mental

framework that functions like a filter by

determining what one counts as genuine knowledge

and what should be disregarded. In this way

plausibility structures play a significant role as

individuals attempt to make sense of the world and

decide how to live within it. Because divinely

inspired writings are unlikely to make it through a

plausibility structure that doubts the existence of a

divine author, a person who does not regard belief

in God to be rational will not likely consider sacred

scriptures to be a weighty source of knowledge.

Throughout this text, readers are encouraged to

take some time to read the Bible for themselves in

order to make an informed decision about it. Its

authority is assumed throughout the material that

follows.

In order to grow in self-awareness and make

progress toward self-understanding, it is critical for

individuals to wrestle honestly with the issue of

knowledge. An honest answer to the simple

question, “How do I know what I know?” may prove

a little unnerving initially, but honest answers are

indispensable if one intends to get to the bottom of

the basic convictions that shape his or her thought

and behavior each day. Without carefully

considering how conclusions have been reached, it

will be difficult to revisit those conclusions in a

critical and constructive way.

Ethics Another key element of a worldview relates to

ethics. Essentially, ethics may be understood as the

systematic study of moral principles that guide

human behavior. As an individual contemplates the

difference between right and wrong, that person

draws on deeply held values that flow out of a

particular worldview. These values serve as criteria

for evaluating particular actions and the morality of

the people who perform them. Whatever one

decides about ethical matters, those decisions will

guide ethical reasoning and behavior.

Experience and intuition suggest that human beings

are deeply moral creatures who are intensely

interested in matters of right and wrong, especially

those matters in which they have a vested interest.

Moral conviction represents a strong impulse that

has fueled major social changes such as the

abolition of slavery in the United States and the end

of apartheid in South Africa. But even in situations

that do not permit careful reflection on ethical

principles, humans demonstrate ethical impulses.

Many, for example, sense a need to silence rowdy

youth in movie theaters, report drunk drivers,

contact child services at the first sign of abuse, and

return library books on time or they feel guilty for

failing to do so. While motives for such activities

vary somewhat from case to case, conduct of this

sort can be explained in part by the fact that some

actions just seem right and others just seem wrong.

The study of ethics quickly raises questions that

relate to the field of knowledge. Distinguishing right

from wrong depends significantly on determining

which sources of moral knowledge are reliable and

authoritative. For instance, before a person decides

to hit the brakes when approaching a crosswalk full

of pedestrians, the driver has already made up his

mind about several issues that are more

fundamental than stopping the car. The driver has

decided that the lives of those crossing the street

are of value and that he bears responsibility for

protecting those lives. The driver has also

determined that his desire to arrive at a destination

quickly is not more significant than the pedestrians

in front of him or his personal responsibility to

protect them. But how does the driver know the

relative value of human life and the nature of his

responsibilities? The sort of understandings that

impel the driver to hit his brakes are rooted deeply

in values that stem from fundamental worldview

assumptions.

Ethical determinations are closely connected to

other worldview commitments. In the case of ethics,

however, self-interest can become a major obstacle

to consistent reflection and genuine understanding.

People are not always as concerned about

distinguishing right from wrong as they are about

excusing and defending their choices. Humans are

wonderfully complex creatures whose lives are

driven by what they love and desire as much as

what they know and understand. Honest self-

examination, although difficult, is essential for

gaining ethical knowledge and a clear

understanding of one’s true moral character.

Purpose One final worldview element worthy of mention

relates to the underlying purpose for the existence

and lives of human beings as well as the world in

which they live. Worldviews typically entail concern

about purpose as it relates in some measure to the

world but especially as it relates to humanity. In the

context of worldview studies, purpose refers to the

underlying reason for which something was created

and the ends for which it currently exists.

Discerning the purpose of some thing or of a living

creature can provide great insight into its nature

and significance. For this reason, purpose has long

been regarded as a matter of perennial concern

among humans who cannot seem to resist asking,

“Why are we here?” and “What should we be doing

with our lives?”

Purpose also provides a means of evaluation. If, for

example, one wants to determine if a racecar is a

good racecar or a bad racecar it will be important to

decide the chief end or goal of a racecar. If the chief

end of a racecar is to win races against other cars,

then the relative goodness of any particular racecar

depends on the car’s ability to meet that goal.

Assuming that the racecar was not created for the

sake of transportation to and from the grocery

store or for hauling boats to the lake, then

evaluation of the racecar should relate primarily to

the winning of races. Therefore, a racecar that wins

races may be considered a better racecar than one

that does not, because winning races fulfills the

purpose for which the car was designed.

Although the matter becomes more complex as it

relates to people, considering the purpose for

human existence is similarly essential for evaluating

individual lives including one’s own. As with other

worldview elements, assumptions about purpose

vary widely from worldview to worldview. When

considering a basic question such as “Why are we

here?” a person will typically respond with some

reference to other convictions related to ultimate

concern, the nature of the universe, and human

nature.

At this point convictions about the nature of

ultimate reality are paramount. If nothing beyond

the physical world exists, then humans must locate

purpose within the physical world and perhaps in

connection with individual preference or cultural

norms. From this perspective purpose does not

necessarily await discovery because the universe

has not been purposefully designed. Rather,

Reliability of Scripture The Christian worldview affirms the Bible as

God’s Word and regards it to be the product

of God who inspired the text of Scripture

through human authors who “spoke from God

as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit”

(2 Peter 1:21 English Standard Version). For

these reasons, Christians believe that the

Bible is the ultimate authority in all matters

upon which it touches and is reliable in

everything it affirms.

Christians have good reasons to believe that

the text of Scripture is reliable and

trustworthy including a strong manuscript

tradition, remarkable efforts throughout

history to preserve the Scriptures, the

historical accuracy of its contents, and the

uncanny accuracy of certain prophetic

passages. Regardless, Christians generally

trust the contents of Scripture because as

they have read it they have personally

encountered Jesus Christ and come face-to-

face with the compelling teachings and

flawless character that marked his ministry.

The claims that Jesus makes about himself in

Scripture, coupled with the extraordinary

story of his death, burial, and resurrection,

offers a powerful antidote to the skepticism of

the present age that cannot be described

adequately. One must experience the wisdom

and the power of Jesus Christ personally in

order to make sense of the compelling nature

of the Christian way of life. Thus, rather than

offering a lengthy argument for the reliability

of the Bible, the authors of this textbook

encourage the reader to take it up and to read

it in order to make an informed decision about

it. Its authority is assumed throughout the

material that follows.

2/16/19, 6(45 PM Page 1 of 1