|
|
| |
|
| by Editor Erik Wait |
| |
 |
| |
In the discussion of worldviews we are basically discussing various and conflicting world views and basic categories which the field of philosophy deals with. Philosophy has two basic functions: First, to think critically and cross examine our basic assumptions in thought, “Why do you believe that?” Second, to set forth observations, not about particular insights such as in the sciences, but rather everything as it underlies all thought but nothing in particular. Thus it is more foundational in thought and thought processes. Thus the philosopher tries to give a “big picture” of reality and a unifying construction in formulating a world view.
Becoming a philosopher is an inevitable process. While some may be intimidated by philosophy in its complexity everyone in some degree is involved in philosophy; in formulating underlying foundational presuppositions and cross examining philosophical assertions whether they use the terminology of philosophy or not; whether or not they realize they are involved in philosophy. Thus whether or not one realizes it one is is involved in philosophy whether they do it well or not.
The beginning of our thinking is curiosity, as babes explore their environment by seeing, touching, and tasting and thus learn to control their environment. Thus they discover that if they learn about things that accumulated knowledge is power over their environment in that they can manipulate things to get the desired response (i.e. crying to be fed, diapers changed etc.).
Beyond early childhood we desire an expanded horizon of understanding, “How do people live outside our neighborhood?” In searching beyond their border and boundaries they develop a system of analysis as they observe connection and relationships between things (heat and cooking, cooking and eating, etc.). We thus begin to organize things and move beyond to develop a method of learning and discipline of inquiry, and rules for making judgments.
In moving beyond childhood the learner discovers the basic elements of his environment in a disciplined method of inquiry in which he goes beyond the mere usefulness of objects and questions their metaphysical construction. By learning the basic elements of objects he discovers the relationships between elements and general laws of inquiry, thus developing a natural or general law (physics, chemistry, etc.). This knowledge adds to the control over one’s environment. The difference between a child’s initial inquiry and this more scientific inquiry is merely a matter of degree in which the learner discovers his environment, formulates a world view, and seeks to relate to the world around him.
At this point the person asks such questions as, “Am I merely a product of my environment and all that I have discovered around me? Or am I free as an individual?” At this point more basic life views, world views, comes into question and the thinker becomes more abstract. Some may find this thinking too difficult are seek to avoid such inquiry but basically the learner begins to ask, “What is real? How can I know what I know is real?”(metaphysics, epistemology) In addition, in relating to one’s environment other general questions arise, “How should I relate to my environment? How should I live my life?” (ethics).
Those question which ask “What is real?” will govern our lives, how we live, and the heart and center of our thinking. Those questions will control what we will consider to be real, how we know what we know and how we should live our lives. In answering those questions we are not only trying to be critical and analytical, so that we have a reliable foundation for what we believe, and what we do, but we are also seeking an overall general unity among the fragmented items of what w know. That is, we are looking for an integration point, a picture in which w can have everything in its place. When we have that picture that helps us to evaluate everything else we do, to interpret the experiences we have and to apply what we have learned to the world. This picture, or integration point, is what might be called your world view or philosophy. A world view is a net work of presuppositions that are not verified by natural science but in terms of which every aspect of experience is interrelated and interpreted. When we talk about a person’s worldview we are talking about their most basic beliefs. This is the core of their web of belief.
No one has just one thing in the center of their thinking. It is impossible to think or believe in just one thing. For example, one cannot merely think “An elephant is heavy” without knowing what an elephant is, what constitutes “heavy” etc. In addition, one must rely on past experiences and memory of elephants, measurements, as well as the English language being used to speak of the elephant. Thus there is a whole host, or web, of thoughts and beliefs in relation to the thought “An elephant is heavy.” Thus all thoughts or beliefs are grouped in clusters of relationships. However, there is a priority of beliefs and value or weight given to various beliefs as some are held to with more tenacity than others. In addition, a cluster of beliefs is not like a bunch of grapes but is systematized and networked in relation to each other. Thus a worldview is a network of presuppositions.
What do presuppositions address? They address three things: (1) Reality -metaphysics, (2) How we know what we know - epistemology (3) How we should live -ethics. As stated before, one’s presuppositions in these three areas are not verified by natural science for presuppositions govern how we interpret the natural sciences. Natural science cannot answer all questions because it cannot answer questions about itself for it relies itself on presuppositions in relation to the reliability of the senses, memory, etc. Thus our most basic presuppositions are based on faith - not a wild leap but basic beliefs. In addition those presuppositions form one’s religion - not a formalized organized religion necessarily but a system of belief held to with ardor and faith as an ultimate commitment which one answers the above three questions.
Key Philosophical Questions Regarding Philosophy
Within everyone’s world view there are basic question which will arrive regarding metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics:
Metaphysics asks such questions such as: “What is the nature of man?” “Is man an animal, is he free?” Also, “What is the nature of the universe?” “Where did the universe come from?” and thus “What’s man place in the universe?” “Does God exist?” “What is the nature of change, development, and history?” “Is history random or by design?” “If the universe is random is anything relevant?” “What is the character of laws?” “What IS a law?”
The reason why philosophers ask such questions is because from birth man is curios about his environment and has formed systems of inquiry. While some may find such question useless because of pragmatism (a philosophy in itself), they do not ask such questions because they do not earn a pay check. Thus they go through life thoughtlessly and failing to ask ultimate questions. In light of the above metaphysical questions it is clear that the Christian world view has a view and answer to all the questions. Thus religion and philosophy seek to address the same question but they use different terminology.
Epistemology asks such questions as: “What is the nature of truth?” “What is the nature of objectivity?” “Is all truth part of the subject and thus is subjective?” “Or is truth outside of the subject and thus true for everybody?” “What is the nature of belief?” “What is the difference between belief and knowledge?” “What are our standards for justified belief and what procedures should we follow to justify them?” “What is the nature of science and discovery?” Again, as Christian our belief gives us a system of Epistemology which is revelational.
Ethics asks such questions as: “What is the nature of good and evil?” “What is the nature of the state and authority?” “How do we obtain and produce moral character?”
The Christian worldview has a standard of guilt, atonement, and personal peace. The Biblical world view answers these questions in the doctrine and history of the fall and the history of redemption.
Within the history of philosophy there have been stumbling questions which have addressed central questions: How can I justify my answers and solve internal conflicts in my methodology? “How are we to understand nature, matter and motion?” “What is the ‘stuff’ of which the universe is made of and how is it possible that it changes?” “Is there one basic element to all stuff?””If there is a one central stuff how does it change to become various things?” “Is reason an instrument for obtaining objective knowledge of reality?” “Or should we throw up our hands and say we cannot know anything?” “By what kind of values should man live?” “Are there objective values?” ”Is man morally distinct from the animals?” “Should reason control our passions?”
The Various Worldviews and Their Categories
While most unbelievers will probably not be aware of the category of their world view and thus will not identify themselves by saying, “I’m a monist...” nevertheless being aware of the various world views and being to identify them will be helpful in our apologetical dialogues to rightly assess the presuppositions of the person to whom we are trying to communicate the gospel.
Historically there have been a worldviews that combine both worldview and metaphysical approaches such as Monism, Dualism and Atomism. Monism asserts that all is one and the one is spirit. We may find this boring but it is typical of Eastern philosophy (e.g. Hinduism). Dualism (Rationalism) asserts that there are two types of things that are real and amongst dualists there are Idealists and Stoics. Idealism states that ultimate reality is not matter but is idea, concepts, and forms (Plato). Idealism’s epistemology holds that one knows things beyond sensation or empirical observation. Thus it is linked to intuitive recollection, rationalism - existential knowledge. Stoicism is a moralistic form of life which assets that there is a “logos” (reason) that flows through life and our job is to get in life with the “logos,” not to be confused with John’s use of Logos in his Gospel. Thus the philosopher seeks to get in the flow of the logos of life and “go with the flow.” Yet there are also inherent moral laws in life which we ought to flow with in life.
Atomism is a form of materialistic monism in that all that exists is matter (Empiricism). in deterministic atomism- There is no freedom from all conforms to the inherent nature of matter; behavioristic psychology and the Marxist view of history. Another is Hedonism which is not deterministic but rather it holds to freewill materialism. Within hedonism there are Egotists, Existentialists, Utilitarians. The Egoist asserts “I should live for what brings ME pleasure” (Epicureans). Some live for quantitative pleasure, others for qualitative. Some focus on the individual, and others for society, “I should live for the greater good of the whole.” These are examples of the “One and the many” problem. The Existentialist is not interested in that you make choices for your or society’s pleasure but only that you make them freely. Thus one is only authentic if one acts freely. The Utilitarians essentially asks, “Is this useful?”
Then there are the Pragmatists who hold that no one knows for sure and thus is inherently skepticism. Thus one should do what works, live for today, just get by. The goal then is not that we should not seek for truth but merely get our side to win.
|
|
