on worldviews (II)

Worldviews, at their most basic level, do four things: (1) They give the stories through which we view reality, (2) they answer the Big Questions, (3) they express themselves in cultural symbols, and (4) they include a praxis, a manner of living that is in accordance with reality. We’ll take these one at a time. 

The Stories. Worldviews aren’t systematic, bullet-point lists giving the ins-&-outs of how reality works. There’s no worldview that simply relies on physics or mathematics, despite what some will have you think. Even those who believe that in the end the universe is nothing more than the interaction of mathematical equations is believing this in light of an over-arching story. Worldviews consist of stories, of narrative tales around which we organize our lives. The Judeo-Christian worldview is composed of an over-arching story under which are sub-stories: the over-arching story being the rescue of creation by the Creator, the sub-stories being those little events all along the way. Worldviews hinge upon story, and any attempt to get rid of the story makes the worldview collapse in on itself. 

The Big Questions. The “worldview questions” are those which every worldview must answer. There are four: “Who are we? Where are we? What is wrong? What’s the solution?” Every worldview answers these questions, and even if a worldview denies the validity of a question—such as the notion that something is wrong—that’s still an answer to the question. Christianity advocates peculiar answers to these questions, as does every worldview, and these answers are subject to criticism & scrutiny, though the most die-hard adherents are often terrified of such irreverence. 

The Symbols. The stories and answers provided by a worldview are expressed in cultural symbols. These symbols can be objects or events, they can be social gatherings and little prayers, architecture and songs. These symbols are protected, and oftentimes the symbols don’t show themselves until they’re challenged. In a sense, these symbols serve as boundary-markers: those who embrace them are Insiders, those who don’t are Outsiders. They’re easy ways to see which worldview a person publically embraces. The symbols of a worldview are affected by the subsequent and consequent beliefs within the worldview (see the next post in line), and thus there’s a variation of symbols within worldviews. 

The Praxis. Every worldview provides a certain manner of being in the world, a modus operandi. The actual contours of a person’s worldview is most evident not in the stories and answers and symbols they claim to hold dear but in the way that they live their lives. One’s habitual actions, one’s decisions, the way a person shapes his or her life all speak to the worldview held. The choice of life direction—making money, getting into a vocation, raising a family, etc.—all reflect one’s worldview, as do the underlying intentions and motivations of the person. It should be noted, of course, that an inconsistency in praxis doesn’t invalidate a person’s worldview, but could simply be illuminating the fact that we’re muddled creatures who often have our hands in two different cookie jars at the same time.