| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
StrawDog
Intern
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 82
Local time: 3:55 PM
Location: Cheltenham
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:41 am Post subject: Re: World View: The Concept |
  |
|
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: | | StrawDog wrote: | | Meh_Gerbil wrote: | James Sire in his book The Universe Next Door defines a world view as:
"A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or false) which we hold (either consciously or subconciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides our foundation on which we live and move and have our being"
What do you think about that defintion? |
I think they're empty words. |
Would you expand on that please?
There is no wrong answer here - I asked for your opinion after all. |
I think they're empty because, they don't really mean anything.
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: | | A worldview is a commitment |
A commitment to who? How can someone have a commitment to themselves? Commitments can be reasonably broken if the parties involved mutually agree, if the only party involved is yourself, then the commitment becomes meaningless because it can be reasonably broken anytime under any cirumstance, and therefore isnt a commitment at all.
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: | | a fundamental orientation of the heart |
I don't understand what 'a fundamental orientation of the heart' could be, a 'worldview' is subject to change, and so doesn't have a fundamental orientation.
The validity of the rest of the sentence relies on the first part making sense (which to me it doesn't).
_________________
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 3:55 PM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | So, yeah, it seems that Gerbil is using the concept of that book to "catalog" the members on AF that would reply to his feeble OP. |
If we know your worldview in advance it makes it so much easier to assign you to the proper work camp when the time comes.
Whoops, I've said too much.
So, what do you think of the definition, Joe? |
You wrote to another esteemed member of AF this: I'll mark you down as another "worldview as a concept is bullshit".
Ditto here.
As for the work camp, I've already made contacts with my connections. Be prepared for an assault... OOPS, I've said too much... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeGeorgeMan
Forum Sheriff
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 413
Local time: 3:55 PM
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
This just in:
The thing that "provides our foundation on which we live and move" is called our 'legs and feet'.
Pretty much the same for everyone, unless you're paralyzed, or a double amputee, or too fat to get out of bed.
Marxists, Existentialists, Child Molesting, Polygamous Mormon cultists...they all pretty much use their legs and feet the same way to get off the couch and go to the fridge to get a snack, or the bathroom to take a wiz.
Scientists theorize that our species bi-pedal foundation and locomotion, is the result of a few million years of hominid evolution, because it provided our hunter/gatherer ancestor species a survival and reproductive advantage in their changing habitats on more open African plains.
I'm guesing Mr. Sire doesn't know much about that. His worldview probably believes the first man was fully formed out of mud by a bi-pedal god, named God.
_________________
...Oozing my brain chemicals in your general direction... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rickyroma
Repressed hippy
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 6516
Local time: 8:55 PM
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
The only time I hear "world view" used is by apologists trying to project their own aspirations to some cranky, rigid, ego-centric, catchphrase-based, personal theory-of-everything onto others.
_________________
Theists wank too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meh_Gerbil
www.manties.net
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 888
Local time: 6:55 AM
Location: What?
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rickyroma wrote: | | The only time I hear "world view" used is by apologists trying to project their own aspirations to some cranky, rigid, ego-centric, catchphrase-based, personal theory-of-everything onto others. |
The attitude of the people who use a phrase shouldn't have any bearing on the actual definition.
What do you think of the definition, sans all the baggage?
_________________
<:3 )~~~
"A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meh_Gerbil
www.manties.net
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 888
Local time: 6:55 AM
Location: What?
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:34 am Post subject: Re: World View: The Concept |
|
|
| StrawDog wrote: |
A commitment to who? How can someone have a commitment to themselves? Commitments can be reasonably broken if the parties involved mutually agree, if the only party involved is yourself, then the commitment becomes meaningless because it can be reasonably broken anytime under any cirumstance, and therefore isnt a commitment at all. |
I think commitment there means nothing more than one's starting point.
For example, if one evaluated everything around them through a naturalistic world view that one would demonstrate a commitment to the idea that something has to be scientifically proveable before it is admitted as truth. If a theist tried to submit the Bible as truth the naturalist would insist that certain criteria be met or the evidence of Scripture would be discarded. Doing so demonstrates a commitment to a particular approach - even if that commitment means the naturalist doesn't get to believe all the nice warm fuzzy things about the afterlife that the theist embraces.
_________________
<:3 )~~~
"A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeGeorgeMan
Forum Sheriff
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 413
Local time: 3:55 PM
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rickyroma wrote: | | The only time I hear "world view" used is by apologists trying to project their own aspirations to some cranky, rigid, ego-centric, catchphrase-based, personal theory-of-everything onto others. |
I'll mark you down as having a 'basic constitution' of 'New&Improved Age, Postal Modern, Graucho Marxist, Antagonistic'1 towards the 'God given reality' you deny...
...even though you know in your spleen, it's really true.
1 This worldview, called RickyRomanism, will be covered in detail, in the upcoming 14th edition, of "The Black Hole Next Door(that sucked my cat right off my lawn!)".
_________________
...Oozing my brain chemicals in your general direction... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meh_Gerbil
www.manties.net
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 888
Local time: 6:55 AM
Location: What?
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | You wrote to another esteemed member of AF this: I'll mark you down as another "worldview as a concept is bullshit". |
Thank you.
Do you have a different word, perhaps one with less baggage that you use to describe a general group of beliefs?
For example, one can use the term "Christian theist" and you've got a pretty good starting point in understanding the person's views.
Again, you could use "naturalist" and get a pretty good starting point in understanding that person's views.
What would you call those catagories (naturalist, deist, christian theist, nihlist) ?
_________________
<:3 )~~~
"A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 3:55 PM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | You wrote to another esteemed member of AF this: I'll mark you down as another "worldview as a concept is bullshit". |
Thank you.
Do you have a different word, perhaps one with less baggage that you use to describe a general group of beliefs?
For example, one can use the term "Christian theist" and you've got a pretty good starting point in understanding the person's views.
Again, you could use "naturalist" and get a pretty good starting point in understanding that person's views.
What would you call those catagories (naturalist, deist, christian theist, nihlist) ? |
How about hardcore atheist? It sounds pr0n, but it isn't... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeGeorgeMan
Forum Sheriff
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 413
Local time: 3:55 PM
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: Re: World View: The Concept |
|
|
| Meh_Gerbil wrote: |
I think commitment there means nothing more than one's starting point.
|
I'm pretty sure commitment and 'starting point' aren't synonyms in my thesaurus. But hey...maybe that's just part of my whacky worldview!
| Quote: |
For example, if one evaluated everything around them through a naturalistic world view that one would demonstrate a commitment to the idea that something has to be scientifically proveable before it is admitted as truth.
|
That's ridiculous. I don't remember any scientist 'proving' to me what exactly is 'causing' some specific storm while I'm out on my boat on Lake George. As a 'naturalist', I chalk it up to the 'weather' and not to Poseidon or Jesus or Evil Spirits.
How about you? What's causing storms in your worldview?
I'm guessing most modern, Western Christians are 'naturalists' when it comes to the weather, unless it's a really big storm like Katrina, and you're a fundy asswipe like Pat Robertson and figured out that Jesus must have caused that storm, cause he's pissed off at homos and feminists....just like Pat is!
| Quote: |
If a theist tried to submit the Bible as truth the naturalist would insist that certain criteria be met or the evidence of Scripture would be discarded.
|
Yikes...you are a confused little rodent. The Bible isn't something with a binary truth value. It's a vast collection of sacred mythology, historical narrative, theology, laws, proverbs, allegories, poetry, and wisdom literature. 'Scripture' is not 'evidence' of anything other than what some ancient people thought, or the stories they told.
Naturalists are simply people who believe the universe and everything in it is the result of natural, versus 'supernatural' forces.
Thus, they may accept the 'truth' of the claim that some first century evangelist named Saul or Paul started some Messianic, Apocalyptic Jewish spinoff cult, as supported by his letters found in the bible, but not that he did so on the telepathic orders of any supernatural being called Christos.
| Quote: |
Doing so demonstrates a commitment to a particular approach - even if that commitment means the naturalist doesn't get to believe all the nice warm fuzzy things about the afterlife that the theist embraces. |
See...that's the problem...theists don't all emrace the same 'nice warm fuzzy things' about the 'afterlife'. That's more bullshit.
I think my 'worldview' is committed to pointing out your bullshit.
_________________
...Oozing my brain chemicals in your general direction...
Last edited by LakeGeorgeMan on Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StrawDog
Intern
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 82
Local time: 3:55 PM
Location: Cheltenham
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | "A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or false) which we hold (either consciously or subconciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides our foundation on which we live and move and have our being" |
Gerbil, would it be possible for you to re-write this paragraph in your own words, minus the poetic language ('fundamental orientation of the heart' for example).
I'd be interested to know what you think it means.
_________________
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wickedtruth
Forum Master
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 2087
Local time: 3:55 PM
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| StrawDog wrote: | | Quote: | | "A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or false) which we hold (either consciously or subconciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides our foundation on which we live and move and have our being" |
Gerbil, would it be possible for you to re-write this paragraph in your own words, minus the poetic language ('fundamental orientation of the heart' for example).
I'd be interested to know what you think it means. |
Well you cant exactly get on the highest soap box can you, you just posted some junk like "Free will doesn't exist"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StrawDog
Intern
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 82
Local time: 3:55 PM
Location: Cheltenham
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wickedtruth wrote: | | StrawDog wrote: | | Quote: | | "A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or false) which we hold (either consciously or subconciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides our foundation on which we live and move and have our being" |
Gerbil, would it be possible for you to re-write this paragraph in your own words, minus the poetic language ('fundamental orientation of the heart' for example).
I'd be interested to know what you think it means. |
Well you cant exactly get on the highest soap box can you, you just posted some junk like "Free will doesn't exist" |
What soapbox? I'm interested in his understanding of the quote.
And about the free will thing, I don't understand what you mean. Either you're joking, or you don't understand the subject of free will...it's hard to tell on the internet
_________________
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meh_Gerbil
www.manties.net
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 888
Local time: 6:55 AM
Location: What?
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| StrawDog wrote: | | Quote: | | "A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or false) which we hold (either consciously or subconciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of reality, and that provides our foundation on which we live and move and have our being" |
Gerbil, would it be possible for you to re-write this paragraph in your own words, minus the poetic language ('fundamental orientation of the heart' for example).
I'd be interested to know what you think it means. |
I think that sounds like a pretty good excercise.
Give me a bit of time on that one.
_________________
<:3 )~~~
"A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meh_Gerbil
www.manties.net
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 888
Local time: 6:55 AM
Location: What?
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Strawdog,
I once had lunch with a Unitarian Universalist minister and we got to talking about the different religions of the world. I asked him his thoughts on the matter and he offered the concept of a "template". He felt each religion was veiwing the same body of truth through a different template.
So if I had to shorten the concept of a worldview I'd probably shorten it to the word "template".
Here is an example:
Three men are sitting on a porch when the cry of 'rape' is raised in the village. Moments later a black man runs by only to be followed by a bunch of fat southern boys carrying pitch forks. A couple of moments later a reporter appears and asks each of the men what just happened.
Man #1:
This man claims he saw a typical black rapist run by with a bunch of good men on his trail. He's satisfied that the evil man is going to get his due quite soon.
Man #2:
This man claims he saw a fine young man running for his life from the cast of Deliverance. It was his hope that the poor black fellow makes it to safety instead of being forced to "squeal like a piggie".
Man #3:
This man claims he saw the town sheriff leading his crew to the scene of a crime.
Man #1 has a template that is colored by racism.
Man #2 has a template that is colored by racism.
Man #3 has a template that is colored by his work in the town elections last fall.
All three men saw the exact same thing, but in another sense they didn't see the exact same thing because the true thing they saw was impacted quite heavily by each individual's template. (The facts of the matter weren't impacted by the template, however) This template is how we translate the world to make sense, it is how we connect the dots, how we arrive at an understanding of the world around us. For each of the templates above there is quite a bit of truth (they all saw a man running, they all saw the pitchforks, they all heard the cry for help) and there is some mis-information as well.
Being aware of one's own template aids in understanding one's own blind spots AND it can open up new levels of communication between ourselves and those who use a different template. That all said, I'd like to work more on a rewording of Sire's definition because I don't think "template" quite covers it. I'd like to see something a bit more precise than a single word.
EDITED TO ADD: A worldview is a bit more fundamental than racism. I think of racism as being a derivative of a worldview, not a tenant of a worldview. Don't get lost in the analogy above.
_________________
<:3 )~~~
"A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
