Philosophy Now Forum

As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

I prefer:

1. theology: God-or-Nature
2. metaphysics: creation of the things of nature out of the self existent God-or-nature.Those two aspects are timeless.
3. epistemology:both rationality and empiricism.These are not mutually exclusive.There is no guarantee God-or-Nature is extramentally ordered or rational.
4.axiology: right and wrong are aspects of the relative world of time.To a degree ,reasoning can release us from some suffering.
5.anthropology: gods are part of how human cultures function.

=Belinda post_id=467751 time=1598255744 user_id=12709]

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

I prefer:

1. theology: God-or-Nature
2. metaphysics: creation of the things of nature out of the self existent God-or-nature.Those two aspects are timeless.
3. epistemology:both rationality and empiricism.These are not mutually exclusive.There is no guarantee God-or-Nature is extramentally ordered or rational.
4.axiology: right and wrong are aspects of the relative world of time.To a degree,reasoning can release us from some suffering.
5.anthropology: gods are part of how human cultures function.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:56 am =Belinda post_id=467751 time=1598255744 user_id=12709]

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

I prefer:

1. theology: God-or-Nature
2. metaphysics: creation of the things of nature out of the self existent God-or-nature.Those two aspects are timeless.
3. epistemology:both rationality and empiricism.These are not mutually exclusive.There is no guarantee God-or-Nature is extramentally ordered or rational.
4.axiology: right and wrong are aspects of the relative world of time.To a degree,reasoning can release us from some suffering.
5.anthropology: gods are part of how human cultures function.

On each theory, who is the biggest benefactor (philosopher) that results in your belief aside from yourself? I wanted to delve deeper on which philosopher discusses which's matter the most

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 9:17 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:56 am =Belinda post_id=467751 time=1598255744 user_id=12709]

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

I prefer:

1. theology: God-or-Nature
2. metaphysics: creation of the things of nature out of the self existent God-or-nature.Those two aspects are timeless.
3. epistemology:both rationality and empiricism.These are not mutually exclusive.There is no guarantee God-or-Nature is extramentally ordered or rational.
4.axiology: right and wrong are aspects of the relative world of time.To a degree,reasoning can release us from some suffering.
5.anthropology: gods are part of how human cultures function.

On each theory, who is the biggest benefactor (philosopher) that results in your belief aside from yourself? I wanted to delve deeper on which philosopher discusses which's matter the most

No particular person benefits from my belief, but my belief is better for others not particularly for myself. My belief as outlined is much the same as that of Spinoza, except that Spinoza believed he could rationally prove extramental truth, but I don't believe this.

It is not possible to itemise the Christian world-view in this way. When one digs into the details hardly any two Christians hold the same beliefs.

It can be done for an individual. We could itemise the views of Aquinas or Billy Graham, say, with some accuracy, but the list would be all wrong for Eckhart and Augustine.

For instance, Item 2 ex nihilo creation (if we really mean nihilo) is a demonstrably absurd idea rejected by many Christians. As Whitehead notes the ordinary Christianity of the masses is a 'religion in search of a metaphysic', not a commitment to a metaphysical theory. It is only when we move beyond this outer populist face of the 'religion that we discover the metaphysical depths and soundness of the 'inner' teachings of Eckhart, the Desert Fathers, the Philokalia and so forth.

Or, to put it another way, there are many kinds of Christians. The task would be to discover the truth underneath all the clutter.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm It is not possible to itemise the Christian world-view in this way. When one digs into the details hardly any two Christians hold the same beliefs.

It can be done for an individual. We could itemise the views of Aquinas or Billy Graham, say, with some accuracy, but the list would be all wrong for Eckhart and Augustine.

For instance, Item 2 ex nihilo creation (if we really mean nihilo) is a demonstrably absurd idea rejected by many Christians. As Whitehead notes the ordinary Christianity of the masses is a 'religion in search of a metaphysic', not a commitment to a metaphysical theory. It is only when we move beyond this outer populist face of the 'religion that we discover the metaphysical depths and soundness of the 'inner' teachings of Eckhart, the Desert Fathers, the Philokalia and so forth.

Or, to put it another way, there are many kinds of Christians. The task would be to discover the truth underneath all the clutter.

But Cicero 117 has just done so ,so it's possible. Cicero117 has made a pretty successful attempt to analyse Xian beliefs in order to compare with 'secular' beliefs. When you want to analyse any idea you have to select categories under which you pigeonhole particular attitudes and beliefs.
The categories Cicero117 chose for pigeonholes are respected academic categories, and I doubt if one could do better.

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

Hi Cicero.

You seem to be concerned with how our universe works from a Christian worldview and compare it to secularism. For this IMO we must begin with the essential question of what the purpose of our universe is and Man's purpose within it.

The essence of Christianity offers a human being the possibility from a universal perspective of conscious EVOLUTION while secularism only offers the possibility for earthly mechanical ADAPTATION. Vertical evolution along the line of being or Horizontal adaptation along the line of secular knowledge: the Cross. Once a person begins to experience this, the mechanics of our universe begin to make sense.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:40 pm But Cicero 117 has just done so ,so it's possible. Cicero117 has made a pretty successful attempt to analyse Xian beliefs in order to compare with 'secular' beliefs. When you want to analyse any idea you have to select categories under which you pigeonhole particular attitudes and beliefs.
The categories Cicero117 chose for pigeonholes are respected academic categories, and I doubt if one could do better.

One could do better by not pigeonholing Christians into limited categories into which most of them do not fit.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:44 pm

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:15 am As you may have known already, the word "worldview" came from the term "weltanschauung" which was used by Kant. Everyone has their own worldview which was usually affected greatly by the environment they live in.

A worldview must answer 5 theory which is the existence of God (theology), metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and anthropology.
Almost all philosophers have addresses their perspective on these matters at least once in their lifetime.

In a christian worldview, all these 5 theories have been answered:
1. theology: Only one God exist (Trinity)
2. metaphysics: creatio ex nihilo
3. epistemology: God is the source of all information, man can understand God but not fully
4. Axiology: Initially God created man with moral but that moral was "disfigured" when man succumbs into sin
5. Anthropology: Man was created in the image of God and our purpose was to glorify him

In a sense I myself has a christian worldview but I am intrigued of what other people think of what a secular worldview is. In this 21st century, what is the secular worldview according to each of you (if possible link it to the 5 theory above).

Each of your answer will mean a lot to me as I want to expand my knowledge in philosophy.

Hi Cicero.

You seem to be concerned with how our universe works from a Christian worldview and compare it to secularism. For this IMO we must begin with the essential question of what the purpose of our universe is and Man's purpose within it.

The essence of Christianity offers a human being the possibility from a universal perspective of conscious EVOLUTION while secularism only offers the possibility for earthly mechanical ADAPTATION. Vertical evolution along the line of being or Horizontal adaptation along the line of secular knowledge: the Cross. Once a person begins to experience this, the mechanics of our universe begin to make sense.

Hi nick, thank you for your answer, though I admit I'm a bit confused of what's the difference between evolution and adaptation? Does the "evolution" have something to do with the "born again" in Christ meanwhile secularism only adapts throughout the era until now? thanks!

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:52 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:40 pm But Cicero 117 has just done so ,so it's possible. Cicero117 has made a pretty successful attempt to analyse Xian beliefs in order to compare with 'secular' beliefs. When you want to analyse any idea you have to select categories under which you pigeonhole particular attitudes and beliefs.
The categories Cicero117 chose for pigeonholes are respected academic categories, and I doubt if one could do better.

One could do better by not pigeonholing Christians into limited categories into which most of them do not fit.

Well, in that case may i know what your christian views on those theories? I want to take into account all views really but what I stated above is just the view that I was taught by my reformed church

cicero117 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:04 pm Well, in that case may i know what your christian views on those theories? I want to take into account all views really but what I stated above is just the view that I was taught by my reformed church

This is as I thought. I admire your willingness to explore beyond what you've been told.

The topic is complex in the details but fairly clear in outline. Christians have a choice as to whether to believe in the 'esoteric' or 'exoteric'' interpretation of the teachings. For the Christianity I was taught while growing up your list would be about right, although it disguises many subtleties. For the 'classical' Christianity of the early church it would be way off the mark. This is the Christianity of St. Anthony, Meister Eckhart, the pseudio-Dionysius, Paul ferrini and the Jesus of the book A Course in Miracles. An excellent introduction would be Keith Ward's book God: A Guide for the Perplexed or David Bentley Hart's Being, Consciousness, Bliss.

This Christianity is perfectly conistent with the non-dualism of the Perennial philosophy and in-line with the teachings of advaita Vedanta, Sufism, Middle Way Buddhism and so forth. This would be why Eckhart can happily quote various pagan masters in his sermons, for they share his understanding of truth and knowledge.

I would recommend the sermons of Eckhart as a method of 'de-programming'. He was punished by his church for them but since then he has been largely forgiven, although is still almost completely ignored.

I doubt the revised dogmatic form of Christianity can survive long in an information age, We're all much too well-informed and scientifically-minded to accept it, but the mystical teachings are Perennial and will never go away.

A list of tenets for the esoteric form of Christianity would look very different. Each of the items would need some discussion though, so I won't try to write it. For instance, God would not really exist, or not in the sense human beings imagine they do. And rather than having no philosophical foundation it is firmly based on a metaphysics of Unity and justifiable in metaphysics.

A huge topic.

Hi cicero

Hi nick, thank you for your answer, though I admit I'm a bit confused of what's the difference between evolution and adaptation? Does the "evolution" have something to do with the "born again" in Christ meanwhile secularism only adapts throughout the era until now? thanks!

This topic isn't well received in secularism since by definition it requires a source of being.

Are you familiar with the Great Chain of Being?

https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/en ... n_of_Being

The Great Chain of Being or scala naturæ is a classical conception of the metaphysical order of the universe in which all beings from the most basic up to the very highest and most perfect being are hierarchically linked to form one interconnected whole. Although this notion was viewed in various ways from antiquity and throughout the medieval period, its philosophical formulation can perhaps best be seen beginning with Aristotle, moving through the Neoplatonists, and culminating in the theological vision of the scholastics.

The vertical chain of being describes the quality of now: its "isness" in relation to its source. In contrast adaptation describes the ways in which a quality of being can adapt to its environment. A horse is a specific quality of being. Yet it can adapt to its environment by becoming larger or smaller for example.

Man is unique to animal life since it has the conscious potential to become a higher quality of being. Born again refers to the beginning of this potential. In Christianity when the soul inwardly turns towards its source it is called metanoia. Plato called it inwardly turning towards the light.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm It is not possible to itemise the Christian world-view in this way.

It might be True that it is NOT actually possible to provide the, so called, "christian view" in any absolute true way.

But for a discussion like this one, one, so called, "world-view" needs to put forward. And, I think the view that was put forward is good enough to start with.

If you can NOT come up with a better or more accurate "world-view", and you do not like the one provided, then just ignore this thread and move along.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm When one digs into the details hardly any two Christians hold the same beliefs.

This fact will be found with EVERY other human being made up separation of 'human beings' into groups, classes, or races.

When looked at deeply and Honestly enough there is NO such actual agreed upon things such as; "christian", "muslim", "hindu", "buddhist", "american", "indian", "italian", "eskimo", "white", "black", "asian", "european", "westerner", et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

All of these things are just labels created and made up to create and cause some sort distinction and separation of "us" AND "them". When thee Truth IS there is NO actual distinction NOR separation that can actually be made and created. Either one is a human being or they are not.

To see how accurate or inaccurate my claim is that there is NO such actual agreed upon thing as those listed above, then just define one of them, and see just how much actual agreement you have with your OWN views and beliefs.

You wrote; When one digs into the details hardly any two, so called, "christians" hold the same beliefs. Which is correct, but what will also be found is, when one investigates deep enough, is that NO two human beings have nor hold the same beliefs.

Either one is a human being, with its very own special individual and unique thoughts, views, and beliefs, or one is not.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm It can be done for an individual. We could itemise the views of Aquinas or Billy Graham, say, with some accuracy, but the list would be all wrong for Eckhart and Augustine.

The ONLY Truly accurate list can come from the individual person them self, which, by the way, is a changing and evolving list. NO one can accurately provide a Truly accurate list for "another". Unless, of course, the list is made together and in collaboration with the "other".

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm For instance, Item 2 ex nihilo creation (if we really mean nihilo) is a demonstrably absurd idea rejected by many Christians.

BUT, if when we dug into the details hardly any two, so called, "christians" hold the same beliefs WHY THEN does what you claim is a "demonstrably absurd idea" suddenly become rejected by "many christians"?

Are you suggesting now that there might be some "christain" 'world-view', in which many of those labeled human beings actually do have the same belief that 'creation from nothing' is absurd, and demonstrably absurd?

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm As Whitehead notes the ordinary Christianity of the masses is a 'religion in search of a metaphysic', not a commitment to a metaphysical theory.

So, you are now using the words of "another" to 'try to' argue that "christianity of the masses" has some sort of 'world-view', to 'try to' back up and support one of your own 'world-views' and beliefs, but which completely contradicts your claim that:
"It is not possible to itemise the Christian world-view in this way." ['This way' being a way that you might not like.}

It appears that you will use the beliefs or 'world-view' of "christianity" when it suits you, but you will also 'try to' make the claim that it is not possible to itemize the "christian" 'world-view' in another way. This is obviously completely contradictory and self-defeating. Unless, of course, you can explain away this apparent contradiction and self-defeating thinking and view.

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm It is only when we move beyond this outer populist face of the 'religion that we discover the metaphysical depths and soundness of the 'inner' teachings of Eckhart, the Desert Fathers, the Philokalia and so forth.

Or, to put it another way, there are many kinds of Christians. The task would be to discover the truth underneath all the clutter.

This was very easily and very simply done. That is; when the clutter stops being created and made.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:40 pm

PeteJ wrote: ↑Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm It is not possible to itemise the Christian world-view in this way. When one digs into the details hardly any two Christians hold the same beliefs.

It can be done for an individual. We could itemise the views of Aquinas or Billy Graham, say, with some accuracy, but the list would be all wrong for Eckhart and Augustine.

For instance, Item 2 ex nihilo creation (if we really mean nihilo) is a demonstrably absurd idea rejected by many Christians. As Whitehead notes the ordinary Christianity of the masses is a 'religion in search of a metaphysic', not a commitment to a metaphysical theory. It is only when we move beyond this outer populist face of the 'religion that we discover the metaphysical depths and soundness of the 'inner' teachings of Eckhart, the Desert Fathers, the Philokalia and so forth.

Or, to put it another way, there are many kinds of Christians. The task would be to discover the truth underneath all the clutter.

But Cicero 117 has just done so ,so it's possible. Cicero117 has made a pretty successful attempt to analyse Xian beliefs in order to compare with 'secular' beliefs. When you want to analyse any idea you have to select categories under which you pigeonhole particular attitudes and beliefs.
The categories Cicero117 chose for pigeonholes are respected academic categories, and I doubt if one could do better.

In the days of when this is being written I agree with this view.