703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking

INTRODUCTION TO
CHRISTIAN
PHILOSOPHY
LTCi Course #703

Does it matter how we think?

Mickey Cohen was a famous
Hollywood gangster. Cohen
attended a Billy Graham Crusade
and when Dr. Graham gave the
invitation to step forward and
accept Christ as Lord and Savior
Mickey Cohen responded and did
just that.

Later, when he was told by the Billy
Graham follow up team that he
needed to cut his ties with
organized crime, Cohen became
incredulous. "You never told me
that I had to give up my career.
you never told me that I had to
give up my friends. There are
Christian Movie Stars,
Christian Athletes, and
Christian Business Men. So
what's the matter with being a
Christian gangster?”

One might ask if religious converts
are supposed to live “better” lives
after their conversion?
Would Cohen’s response be
acceptable today?
Does it show a lack of
understanding of what the real
demands (mental and practical) of
the Christian life are? Did he fail to
understand the Christian
worldview?
If someone calls themselves a
Christian are they in fact meant to
behave differently?

Our worldview is important
Philosophy teaches us that our
worldview is important.
Often in society today we fail to
examine the worldview of
people who propose ideas - the
way they think about things is
important in helping form their
ideas.
Ideas have consequences!

Our worldview is important
“A worldview contains a
person’s answers to the
major questions in life,
almost all of which contain
signiﬁcant philosophical
content. It is a conceptual
framework, pattern or
arrangement of a person’s
beliefs. The best world views
are comprehensive,
systematic, and supposedly
true views of life and of the
world.”

Many world views suffer from
incompleteness, inconsistencies, and
other failings - the result is that the
pieces of the worldview do not ﬁt
properly together.
For example you might meet
someone who has what you consider
an obvious blindspot in their
thinking which leads to (in your
opinion) some strange thinking. Of
course they might also think the
same about you!

Are these worldview inconsitencies?
Manyinconsistent tofrom a vegetarian and have
world views suffer be
Is it
incompleteness, inconsistencies, and
an abortion?
other failings - the result is that the
Can you believe indo not ﬁt Bible and in
pieces of the worldview God, the
evolution?
properly together.
For example you might love God and yet not share
Can you claim to meet
someone who has what Jesus Christ with everyone
the good news of you consider
an obvious blindspot in their
you meet?
thinking which leads to (in your
Is it inconstant to believe it is important for
opinion) some strange thinking. Of
governments to help the poor in society and
course they might also think the
samenot honestly declare all of your taxable
yet about you!
income?

Philosophy helps us
understand what a worldview
is
- it also helps us understand,
and improve, our own
worldview
- it teaches us that some world
views are better than others,
not all views are equal
- there are tests or criteria by
which world views can be
assessed - in fact these criteria
are outlines in the next section!

Five Central worldview beliefs
Worldviews have at least 5 central
parts to them, their beliefs about;
- God
- Metaphysics (ultimate reality)
- Epistemology (knowledge)
- Ethics
- Human nature
There are of course other parts to
a worldview but these are primary
in helping identify differences in
peoples worldviews

1. God
What does your worldview say about God?
- does he exist?
- is there one or more gods?
- what is God like, the nature of God
- is God kind and loving, how can he act on the earth
and in the lives of people?
- Is God just a force or power?
Christians believe in One God, other religions have
two (daulistic), some are polytheistic (many gods), or
pantheistic (the world is all divine in some sense)

2. Metaphysics
What is the relationship between
God and the universe?
Is the universe eternal?
Was the universe created by an
eternal, all powerful, personal
God?
Are god and the world co-eternal
and interdependent beings?
Does the universe have a purpose?
What is its ultimate purpose?

2. Metaphysics
Is the cosmos material, spiritual or
something else?
Is the universe a self contained
system - in that all events within it
are caused by, and thus explained
by, something within it?
Can a being outside of nature act
within it to affect change in some
way?
Can miracles occur?

3. Epistemology
A theory of knowledge - everyone has
one, they just don’t know it!
Do you believe knowledge about the
world is possible?
Can we trust our senses?
What are the proper roles for reason and
sense experience in knowledge? Do we
understand our level of consciousness in
other ways to these?
Are intuitions reliable ways of perceiving
the world?

3. Epistemology
Is truth relative or is it the same for all
rational beings?
What is the relationship between
religious faith and reason?
Can we know God? If yes, how?
How does God relate to the human
mind?
Most people will not always be thinking
about these questions - but if asked they
will probably be able to formulate some
sort of answer

4. Ethics
This is an area people are more readily aware of their
belief in.
We make moral judgements about ourselves, others etc. In
this context we are interested in what we as individuals
think.
So we might believe Adolf Hitler was wrong in his actions ethics wants to know why we believe that his actions were
wrong?

We are asking: are there moral laws
governing human action? Are such
laws the same for all people or are
they subjective (like taste for pork) is there an objective moral
dimension which means such moral
laws are independent of our
preference or opinions?
Are these moral laws discovered in
the same way that we know
7x7=49, or do we ﬁnd them
through human custom?

Is morality relative to a time period
- e.g. slavery is not condemned in
the Bible but most believers do not
have slaves nowadays.
Is the same action right in one time
but wrong in another?
Does our morality transcend
cultural, historical and individual
boundaries?

5. Anthropology
What do we believe about the nature of
human beings?
Are human beings free or simply subject
to deterministic forces?
Are humans only bodies, or more?
Can we distinguish our mind from our
body?
What is the human soul?
Does the person end with physical
death?
Are humans good or evil - do we get a
reward for the way our life was lived?

Some good news
The information given does not mean
we have to agree about everything!
We, as Christians, might agree on the
major issues of our faith whilst
disagreeing on human free will/the
sovereignty of God, should the death
penalty still be implemented today?
etc.
When we disagree we should be able
to argue in love and try to persuade
one another that our view is more
consistent with the basic beliefs of
Christianity.

Some good news
There should be a ﬁrm foundation
of underlying beliefs - however if
the disagreement is on these
matters then we have to consider if
the person has left the Christian
faith.
For example, can you be a
Christian and not believe in fallen
human nature, the deity of Christ,
the Trinity…?

We all have a worldview - often we have simply not thought
about it, or expressed it.
Our worldview helps us to explain why we see the world as
we do and why we act in a certain way.
When we have differing world views within our own system
of beliefs it creates a clash. This also happens between
individuals, groups or nations and can lead from a simple
argument to full blown war.
Having the right worldview will bring people, the world and
God into proper focus - it is very helpful!

Worldview thinking and religion
Christianity should not be viewed as a
collection of bits and pieces which do
not interact with one another - but as a
conceptual system offering a total world
and life view.
This applies to all religions - and they
can then be compared on the merits of
these total systems.
As a world and life view Christianity has
much to say about the whole of human
life - but this should be understood
within the total context of our beliefs
not by focussing on narrow issues

Our religious beliefs are not limited to one area of life they affect every other area too, all we believe and do.
“All humans have something that concerns them
ultimately, and whatever it is, that area of ultimate
concern is that person’s God” Nash
A person’s ultimate concern has a massive effect on the
way they live.
Zylstra suggests that no human is religiously neutral…

“To be human is to be scientiﬁc, yes, and
practical, and rational, and moral, and
social, and artistic, but to be human
further is to be religious also. And this
religious in man is not just another facet
of himself, just another side to his
nature, just another part of the whole. It
is the condition of all the rest and the
justiﬁcation of all the rest. This is
inevitably and inescapably so for all
men. No man is religiously neutral in
his knowledge of and his appropriation
of reality.”
Henry Zylstra,

In effect he is saying that the world
does not have religious and
nonreligious people but people who
are all religious, but who all have
differing ultimate concerns and
differing gods - and who thus
respond to the Living God in
differing ways.

Nash goes on to say, “All humans
are incurably religious; we manifest
different religious allegiances…

“This point obliterates much of the
usual distinction between the sacred
and the secular. A teacher or politician
who pretends to be religiously neutral
is not thinking deeply. Secular
humanism is a religious worldview as
certainly as are Christianity and
Judaism. It expresses the ultimate
commitments and concerns of its
proponents.”

The role of presuppositions
presupposition noun
Augustine declared that before a
a thingbeing can know anything, they
human tacitly assumed (understood
must believe something. stated)
or implied without being
beforehand at the we take
Whenever we thinkbeginning of a
something for granted - all our
line of argument or course of
beliefs rest upon other beliefs that we
action
presuppose or accept without support
e.g. both men or evidence.
from arguments shared certain
ethical presuppositions about the
Thomas V. Morris expresses it this way,
universe.

The role of presuppositions
Augustine declared that before a
human being can know anything, they
must believe something.
Whenever we think we take
something for granted - all our
beliefs rest upon other beliefs that we
presuppose or accept without support
from arguments or evidence.
Thomas V. Morris expresses it this way,

The most important presuppositions
are the most basic and most general
beliefs about God, man, and the world
that anyone can have. They are not
usually consciously entertained but
rather function as the perspective from
which an individual sees and interprets
both the events of his own life and the
circumstances of the world around
him. These presuppositions in
conjunction with one another delimit
the boundaries within which all other
less foundational beliefs are held.

People from many ﬁelds make
important assumptions:
Scientists assume that knowledge is
possible and that sense experience is
reliable (epistemology), that the
universe is regular (metaphysics),
and that scientists should be honest
(ethics).
Without such assumptions scientiﬁc
enquiry would soon collapse.

Basic assumptions and
presuppositions are important
because they set the method and
goal of theoretical thought - like
being on a train line with no side
tracks - there is only one possible
way to go, the direction and
destination are determined.
So accepting the presuppositions of
a Christian worldview will lead to
different conclusions to those drawn
by someone who has naturalistic
presuppositions

Paradigms
Nash says that one of the purposes of
his book is to help people to recognise
the unseen, overlooked patterns that
operate in and control much human
thinking, including many of the most
famous and popular philosophical
theories.
Nash says, “A paradigm is a habitual way
of thinking. In a sense every worldview is
composed of many smaller paradigms. A
worldview, in other words, is a collection of
paradigms”

Paradigms act in placing boundaries
and filtering information within our
thinking - they allow in data that fits in
with the paradigm and exclude data
that will not. Importantly they also
screen data to see if it fits within the
model.
For example for many centuries the
Ptolemaic model of the solar system
was accepted until Copernicus came
up with a model with the sun at the
centre. It took time (and a battle
against opponents) for the old model
to be overtaken by the new.
We experience many forms of
paradigm: race, religion etc.

Personal considerations
Worldview is a personal matter and cannot on that basis be
separated from who we are and
how we are made up - our personal
considerations. We have to ask if
we are able to consider new data in
a reasonable way, to give it a fair
hearing, especially if it is going to
threaten their system.
Often non theoretical factors
massively affect peoples theoretical
judgments

Consider racial prejudice - often
untrue beliefs and stereotypes are
used to reinforce prejudice. These
might be historical, personal or
theoretical - whatever the case they
affect the way you think.
Nash also suggests some people
reject God (Christianity) not on the
basis of any properly held
worldview but because of the way
their heart (centre of religious
affection) has been affected.

Consider racial prejudice - often
untrue beliefs and stereotypes are
“…it does seem that some
used to reinforce prejudice. These
people who appear to reject
might be historical, what they
Christianity on personal or
theoretical - rationalthe case they
regard as whatever
affect the way grounds are
you think.
theoretical
Nash also suggests some people
acting under the inﬂuence
reject God (Christianity) not on the
of non rational factors, that
basis of any properly held
is, more ultimate
worldview but because of the way
commitments of their
their heart (centre of religious
hearts”” been affected.
affection) has

1. The contemporary philosophical
assault on conceptual systems
Nash describes how during the 20th
century philosophers became
increasingly hostile towards
philosophical system building - because
they saw the problems and
inconsistencies within them. Instead
they concentrated their efforts on
understanding small, isolated issues,
problems and puzzles.

1. The contemporary philosophical
assault on conceptual systems
Some suggested this over
specialisation was a weakness and
stopped formation of comprehensive
worldviews and avoided controversial
questions.
Nash suggests that, “No one in his or
her right mind …believes that the
choice between a conceptual system
and philosophical analysis is an
either / or situation”

2. Confusion - and not seeing it
Nash recalls an incident where a
professor saw a Playboy bunny on
the back of a car and a statue of the
virgin Mary on the front dashboard
- symbols that seem to be
incompatible, one represents lust
and immorality, the other purity
and submission to God.
Why were both in the same car?
- two different people drove the car
and each placed their identifying
mark there?

2. Confusion - and not seeing it
- someone placed both in the car but
had no understanding of why they
were in conﬂict
People are confused - and they do not
even recognise it!
They do not recognise that the
different pieces of their worldview do
not belong together - and possible
they have never thought they needed
to as there is no need to be logically
cognisant of their incoherent beliefs.

Evaluating a worldview
Is it intolerant to disagree with,
and ask questions of, the views
held by another person?
Should we believe that all world
views are created equal - whether
created by Hitler, Stalin or
Mother Theresa? In effect saying,
“You have your worldview, I have
mine, each is as good as the
other”
Nash suggests we should test
worldviews and gives us four tests.

1. The test of Reason
Also known as logic or the law of
noncontradiction.
“The law of noncontradiction states that
A, which can stand for anything, cannot
be both B and non-B at the same time in
the same sense”
So a proposition cannot be both
true and false at the same time in
the same sense - an object cannot
be both round and square at the
same time and in the same sense.

1. The test of Reason
The presence of a logical
contradiction is always a sign of
error So a conceptual system
should be logically consistent in its
parts and as a whole.
Worldviews should always be tested
in this way - inconsistency indicates
error (which has to be addressed)
This should not be the only test
applied - it is a negative test looking
for contradiction - but that alone
does not mean the presence of
truth.

2. The test of Outer Experience
Worldviews need to pass the test not
only of reason but of experience in other words is it relevant to what
we know of the world and ourselves.
This will include our outer and
inner world.
Does the worldview conﬂict with
what we know to be true of the
physical world?
The worldview helps us to
understand what we perceive and
experience.
What of a worldview that claims;

2. The test of Outer Experience
Pain and suffering and death
are illusions
All human beings are innately
good
Human beings are making
constant progress towards
perfection
In effect we ask can we trust a
worldview that ignores or is
inconsistent with human
experience?

3. The test of Inner Experience
Objective validation of a worldview
is provided outwardly through
experience - but what of inward,
subjective, validation through what
we know of our inner world?
Does the worldview ﬁt in with what
you know of yourself ?
I am a being who thinks, hopes,
experiences pleasure and pain,
believes and desires.
I am a being who has some sense
of moral right and feels guilt for
failing to do what is right.

I am conscious of the present,
remember the past and
anticipate the future.
I can think about, plan and
execute my plans.
I can act intentionally, not
simply in response to stimuli.
I can love.
I can empathise, share
emotions and know that
someday I shall die.
Although some of these are hard
to evaluate this does not mean we
have to ignore them.

“Worldviews that cannot
do justice to an internal
moral obligation or to the
guilt we sense when we
disobey such duties or to
the human encounter with
genuine love are clearly
defective when compared
to the biblical worldview”

4. The test of Practice
A worldview must be capable of
being lived out - not simply
theoretically thought out in the
classroom.
Is your worldview consistent with
your life?
Francis Schaeffer saw this as being
important, his view is explained
like this, “the external world with
its form and complexity, and the
internal world of the man’s own
characteristics as a human being.”

Changing worldviews
It is clearly possible for people to
have a radical (or less radical)
change of worldview.
Consider Saul of Tarsus - great
enemy of the church standing for
almost the opposite of it in most
things - then an experience led to a
very dramatic change of heart and
mind and action
This happens with all sorts of
people in society - religious become
atheist, humanist become theist etc.
and vice versa.

It is not possible to narrow down what
the changes in peoples lives are caused
by.
For some who were unaware of even
having a worldview change sometimes
comes about through sudden life change
or event.
Change might involve a period of doubt
and questioning - though to people on
the outside the change might seem to
have happened rapidly.
It is also possible that a tipping point is
reached where one factor is suddenly
seen in a new light and change happens
rapidly and dramatically

703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking

703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à 703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking

Similaire à 703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking (20)

Plus de Richard Chamberlain

Plus de Richard Chamberlain (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

703, Introduction to Christian Philosophy: Nash, worldview thinking