World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/World_view

World view
A world view[1] or worldview is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society
encompassing the whole of the individual's or society's knowledge and point of view. A world view can include
natural philosophy; fundamental, existential, and normative postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and
ethics.[2] The term is a calque of the German word Weltanschauung [ˈvɛlt.ʔanˌʃaʊ.ʊŋ] (  listen), composed
of Welt ('world') and Anschauung ('view' or 'outlook').[3] The German word is also used in English.

It is a concept fundamental to German philosophy and epistemology and refers to a wide world perception.
Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs forming a global description through which an
individual, group or culture watches and interprets the world and interacts with it.

Worldview remains a confused and confusing concept in English, used very differently by linguists and
sociologists. It is for this reason that Underhill suggests five subcategories: world-perceiving, world-
conceiving, cultural mindset, personal world, and perspective (see Underhill 2009, 2011 & 2012).

Worldviews are often taken to operate at a conscious level, directly accessible to articulation and discussion,
as opposed to existing at a deeper, pre-conscious level, such as the idea of "ground" in Gestalt psychology and
media analysis. However, core worldview beliefs are often deeply rooted, and so are only rarely reflected on
by individuals, and are brought to the surface only in moments of crises of faith.

David Bell recently raised the question – could those individuals with the worldviews be artefacts? Interesting
questions arise for the designers of superintelligences – machines much smarter than humans. Would they
need worldviews, where would they get their worldviews and what would they be like?

Contents
Origins
Linguistics
Weltanschauung and cognitive philosophy
Folk-epics
Terror management theory
Impact
Causality
Religion
Philosophy
Characteristics
Classification of cultural worldviews
Guilt–Innocence
Honor–Shame
Power–Fear
Streams in contemporary American thought
Assessment and comparison
See also

1 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

References
External links

Origins

Linguistics
The founder of the idea that language and worldview are inextricable is the Prussian philologist, Wilhelm von
Humboldt (1767–1835). Humboldt argued that language was part of the creative adventure of mankind.
Culture, language and linguistic communities developed simultaneously, he argued, and could not do so
without one another. In stark contrast to linguistic determinism, which invites us to consider language as a
constraint, a framework or a prison house, Humboldt maintained that speech is inherently and implicitly
creative. Human beings take their place in speech and continue to modify language and thought by their
creative exchanges.

Edward Sapir also gives an account of the relationship between thinking and speaking in English.[4]

The linguistic relativity hypothesis of Benjamin Lee Whorf describes how the syntactic-semantic structure of
a language becomes an underlying structure for the world view or Weltanschauung of a people through the
organization of the causal perception of the world and the linguistic categorization of entities. As linguistic
categorization emerges as a representation of worldview and causality, it further modifies social perception
and thereby leads to a continual interaction between language and perception.[5]

The hypothesis was well received in the late 1940s, but declined in prominence after a decade. In the 1990s,
new research gave further support for the linguistic relativity theory, in the works of Stephen Levinson and
his team at the Max Planck institute for psycholinguistics at Nijmegen, Netherlands.[6] The theory has also
gained attention through the work of Lera Boroditsky at Stanford University.

Weltanschauung and cognitive philosophy

One of the most important concepts in cognitive philosophy and cognitive sciences is the German concept of
Weltanschauung. This expression has often been used to refer to the "wide worldview" or "wide world
perception" of a people, family, or person. The Weltanschauung of a people originates from the unique world
experience of a people, which they experience over several millennia.The language of a people reflects the
Weltanschauung of that people in the form of its syntactic structures and untranslatable connotations and its
denotations.

The term Weltanschauung is often wrongly attributed to Wilhelm von Humboldt, the founder of German
ethnolinguistics (see Trabant). As Jürgen Trabant points out, however, and as Underhill reminds us in his
Humboldt, Worldview and Language (2009), Humboldt's key concept was Weltansicht. Weltanschauung,
used first by Kant and later popularized by Hegel, was always used in German and later used in English to
refer more to philosophies, ideologies and cultural or religious perspectives, than to linguistic communities
and their mode of apprehending reality.

Weltansicht was used by Humboldt to refer to the overarching conceptual and sensorial apprehension of
reality shared by a linguistic community (Nation). But Humboldt maintained that the speaking human being

2 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

was the core of language. Speech maintains worldviews. Worldviews are not prisons which contain and
constrain us, they are the spaces we develop within, create and resist creatively in speaking together.

A worldview can be expressed as the "fundamental cognitive, affective, and evaluative presuppositions a
group of people make about the nature of things, and which they use to order their lives."[7]

If it were possible to draw a map of the world on the basis of Weltanschauung,[8] it would probably be seen to
cross political borders—Weltanschauung is the product of political borders and common experiences of a
people from a geographical region,[8] environmental-climatic conditions, the economic resources available,
socio-cultural systems, and the language family.[8] (The work of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-
Sforza aims to show the gene-linguistic co-evolution of people).

If the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is correct, the worldview map of the world would be similar to the linguistic
map of the world. However, it would also almost coincide with a map of the world drawn on the basis of
music across people.[8]

Folk-epics
As natural language becomes manifestations of world perception, the literature of a people with common
Weltanschauung emerges as holistic representations of the wide world perception of the people. Thus the
extent and commonality between world folk-epics becomes a manifestation of the commonality and extent of
a worldview.

Epic poems are shared often by people across political borders and across generations. Examples of such
epics include the Nibelungenlied of the Germanic people, the Iliad for the Ancient Greeks and Hellenized
societies, the Silappadhikaram of the Tamil people, the Ramayana and Mahabharata of the Hindus, the
Gilgamesh of the Mesopotamian-Sumerian civilization and the people of the Fertile Crescent at large, The
Book of One Thousand and One Nights (Arabian nights) of the Arab world and the Sundiata epic of the
Mandé people.

Terror management theory

A worldview, according to terror management theory (TMT), serves as a buffer against death anxiety.[9] It is
theorised that living up to the ideals of one's worldview provides a sense of self-esteem which provides a sense
of transcending the limits of human life (e.g. literally, as in religious belief in immortality, symbolically, as in
art works or children to live on after one's death, or in contributions to one's culture).[9] Evidence in support
of terror management theory includes a series of experiments by Jeff Schimel and colleagues in which a group
of Canadians found to score highly on a measure of patriotism were asked to read an essay attacking the
dominant Canadian worldview.[9]

Using a test of death-thought accessibility (DTA), involving an ambiguous word completion test (e.g.
"COFF__" could either be completed as either "COFFEE" or "COFFIN"), participants who had read the essay
attacking their worldview were found to have a significantly higher level of DTA than the control group, who
read a similar essay attacking Australian cultural values. Mood was also measured following the worldview
threat, to test whether the increase in death thoughts following worldview threat were due to other causes, for
example, anger at the attack on one's cultural worldview.[9] No significant changes on mood scales were found
immediately following the worldview threat.[9]

To test the generalisability of these findings to groups and worldviews other than those of nationalistic

3 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

Canadians, Schimel et al conducted a similar experiment on a group of religious individuals whose worldview
included that of creationism.[9] Participants were asked to read an essay which argued in support of the
theory of evolution, following which the same measure of DTA was taken as for the Canadian group.[9]
Religious participants with a creationist worldview were found to have a significantly higher level of death-
thought accessibility than those of the control group.[9]

Goldenberg et al found that highlighting the similarities between humans and other animals increases death-
thought accessibility, as does attention to the physical rather than meaningful qualities of sex.[10]

Impact
The term World View denotes a comprehensive set of opinions, seen as an organic unity, about the world as
the medium and exercise of human existence. World View serves as a framework for generating various
dimensions of human perception and experience like knowledge, politics, economics, religion, culture,
science and ethics. For example, worldview of causality as uni-directional, cyclic, or spiral generates a
framework of the world that reflects these systems of causality.

Causality
A unidirectional view of causality is present in some monotheistic views of the world with a beginning and an
end and a single great force with a single end (e.g., Christianity and Islam), while a cyclic worldview of
causality is present in religious traditions which are cyclic and seasonal and wherein events and experiences
recur in systematic patterns (e.g., Zoroastrianism, Mithraism and Hinduism). These worldviews of causality
not only underlie religious traditions but also other aspects of thought like the purpose of history, political
and economic theories, and systems like democracy, authoritarianism, anarchism, capitalism, socialism and
communism.

The worldview of a linear and non-linear causality generates various related/conflicting disciplines and
approaches in scientific thinking. The Weltanschauung of the temporal contiguity of act and event leads to
underlying diversifications like determinism vs. free will. A worldview of free will leads to disciplines that are
governed by simple laws that remain constant and are static and empirical in scientific method, while a
worldview of determinism generates disciplines that are governed with generative systems and rationalistic in
scientific method.

Some forms of philosophical naturalism and materialism reject the validity of entities inaccessible to natural
science. They view the scientific method as the most reliable model for building an understanding of the
world.

Religion
Nishida Kitaro wrote extensively on "the Religious Worldview" in exploring the philosophical significance of
Eastern religions.[11]

According to Neo-Calvinist David Naugle's World view: The History of a Concept, "Conceiving of Christianity
as a worldview has been one of the most significant developments in the recent history of the church."[12]

The Christian thinker James W. Sire defines a worldview as "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 entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently)

4 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

about the basic construction of reality, and that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have
our being." He suggests that "we should all think in terms of worldviews, that is, with a consciousness not
only of our own way of thought but also that of other people, so that we can first understand and then
genuinely communicate with others in our pluralistic society."[13]

The commitment mentioned by James W. Sire can be extended further. The worldview increases the
commitment to serve the world. With the change of a person's view towards the world, he/she can be
motivated to serve the world. This serving attitude has been illustrated by Tareq M Zayed as the
'Emancipatory Worldview' in his writing "History of emancipatory worldview of Muslim learners".[14]

The question mentioned above - on whether the super-smart machines, that is, any superintelligences, as
expected by some, could have worldviews - is interesting in this context and this would have an impact on
human worldviews.

Philosophy
The philosophical importance of worldviews became increasingly clear during the 20th century for a number
of reasons, such as increasing contact between cultures, and the failure of some aspects of the Enlightenment
project, such as the rationalist project of attaining all truth by reason alone. Mathematical logic showed that
fundamental choices of axioms were essential in deductive reasoning[15] and that, even having chosen axioms
not everything that was true in a given logical system could be proven.[16] Some philosophers believe the
problems extend to "the inconsistencies and failures which plagued the Enlightenment attempt to identify
universal moral and rational principles";[17] although Enlightenment principles such as universal suffrage and
the universal declaration of human rights are accepted, if not taken for granted, by many.[18]

The theory of relativity offers a Weltanschauung that is revolting to absolute space and time, yet provides a
context for modern theories of electromagnetism and gravity. In a book review for a new undergraduate
textbook on relativity by Wolfgang Rindler, Kenneth Jacobs[19] noted that "during the post-Sputnik era,
special relativity began to take its rightful place in the undergraduate curriculum". On the adoption of the
Weltanschauung, he notes, "The historical impact of any world picture is ... partly attributable to the zeal of
the promulgators and to the efficacy of their teachings."

Philosophers also distinguish the manifest image from the scientific image. These phrases are due to the
American 20th century philosopher Wilfrid Sellars. This is one angle on the ancient philosophical distinction
between appearance and reality which is particularly pertinent to everyday contemporary living. Indeed,
many believe that the scientific image, with its reductionist methodology, will undermine our sense of
individual freedom and responsibility. So, many worry that as science advances, particularly cognitive
neuroscience, we will be dehumanized. This certainly has powerful Nietzschean undertones. When our
immediately given, manifest (sc. obvious) self-conception is shaken, what is lost for the individual and
society? And does it have to be that way?[20] Some questions well worth working on, then, are those
concerning the refinement of the manifest view of such centrally important concepts such as free will,[21] the
self and individuality, and the possibility of real or lived meaning.

Characteristics
While Leo Apostel and his followers clearly hold that individuals can construct worldviews, other writers
regard worldviews as operating at a community level, or in an unconscious way. For instance, if one's
worldview is fixed by one's language, as according to a strong version of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, one

5 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

would have to learn or invent a new language in order to construct a new worldview.

According to Apostel,[22] a worldview is an ontology, or a descriptive model of the world. It should comprise
these six elements:

1. An explanation of the world

2. A futurology, answering the question "Where are we heading?"
3. Values, answers to ethical questions: "What should we do?"
4. A praxeology, or methodology, or theory of action: "How should we attain our goals?"
5. An epistemology, or theory of knowledge: "What is true and false?"
6. An etiology. A constructed world-view should contain an account of its own "building blocks", its origins
and construction.

Classification of cultural worldviews

From across the world across all of the cultures, Roland Muller has suggested that cultural world views can be
broken down into three separate world views.[23] It is not simple enough to say that each person is one of
these three cultures. Instead, each individual is a mix of the three. For example, a person may be raised in a
Power–Fear society, in a Honor–Shame family, and go to school under a Guilt–Innocence system.

Guilt–Innocence
In a Guilt–Innocence focused culture, schools focus on deductive reasoning, cause and effect, good questions,
and process. Issues are often seen as black and white. Written contracts are paramount. Communication is
direct, and can be blunt.[24]

Honor–Shame
Societies with a predominantly Honor–Shame worldview teach children to make honorable choices according
to the situations they find themselves in. Communication, interpersonal interaction, and business dealings
are very relationship-driven, with every interaction having an effect on the Honor–Shame status of the
participants. In an Honor–Shame society the crucial objective is to avoid shame and to be viewed honorably
by other people. The Honor–Shame paradigm is especially strong in most regions of Asia.[25]

Power–Fear
Some cultures can be seen very clearly in operating under a Power–Fear worldview. In these cultures it is very
important to assess the people around you and know where they fall in line according to their level of power.
This can be used for good or for bad. A benevolent king rules with power and his citizens fully support him
wielding that power. On the converse, a ruthless dictator can use his power to create a culture of fear where
his citizens are oppressed.

Streams in contemporary American thought

According to Michael Lind, "a worldview is a more or less coherent understanding of the nature of reality,
which permits its holders to interpret new information in light of their preconceptions. Clashes among
worldviews cannot be ended by a simple appeal to facts. Even if rival sides agree on the facts, people may
disagree on conclusions because of their different premises." This is why politicians often seem to talk past
one another, or ascribe different meanings to the same events. Tribal or national wars are often the result of

6 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

incompatible worldviews. Lind has organized American political worldviews into five categories:

Green Malthusianism synthesizes mystical versions of environmentalism with alarm about population
growth in the tradition of the Rev. Thomas Malthus
Libertarian Isolationism would abandon foreign alliances, dismantle most of its military, and return to a
19th-century pattern of decentralized government and an economy based on small businesses and small
farms.
Neoliberal Globalism believes that at home governments should provide only basic public goods like
infrastructure and security, and do so by market-friendly methods
Populist Nationalism tends to favor restriction of legal as well as illegal immigration to protect the core
stock of the tribe-state from dilution by different races, ethnic groups or religions. Populist nationalism
also tends to favor protectionist policies that shield workers and businesses, particularly small
businesses, from foreign competition.
Social Democracy claims an economic safety net, protecting citizens from unemployment, sickness,
poverty in old age and other disasters, is necessary if democratic government is to retain popular
support.
Lind argues that even though not all people will fit neatly into only one category or the other, their core
worldview shape how they frame their arguments.[26]

Assessment and comparison

One can think of a worldview as comprising a number of basic beliefs which are philosophically equivalent to
the axioms of the worldview considered as a logical theory. These basic beliefs cannot, by definition, be
proven (in the logical sense) within the worldview precisely because they are axioms, and are typically argued
from rather than argued for.[27] However their coherence can be explored philosophically and logically.

If two different worldviews have sufficient common beliefs it may be possible to have a constructive dialogue
between them.[28]

On the other hand, if different worldviews are held to be basically incommensurate and irreconcilable, then
the situation is one of cultural relativism and would therefore incur the standard criticisms from
philosophical realists.[29][30][31] Additionally, religious believers might not wish to see their beliefs relativized
into something that is only "true for them".[32][33] Subjective logic is a belief-reasoning formalism where
beliefs explicitly are subjectively held by individuals but where a consensus between different worldviews can
be achieved.[34]

A third alternative sees the worldview approach as only a methodological relativism, as a suspension
judgment about the truth of various belief systems but not a declaration that there is no global truth. For
instance, the religious philosopher Ninian Smart begins his Worldviews: Cross-cultural Explorations of
Human Beliefs with "Exploring Religions and Analysing Worldviews" and argues for "the neutral,
dispassionate study of different religious and secular systems—a process I call worldview analysis."[35]

The comparison of religious, philosophical or scientific worldviews is a delicate endeavor, because such
worldviews start from different presuppositions and cognitive values. Clément Vidal[36] has proposed
metaphilosophical criteria for the comparison of worldviews, classifying them in three broad categories:

1. objective: objective consistency, scientificity, scope

2. subjective: subjective consistency, personal utility, emotionality
3. intersubjective: intersubjective consistency, collective utility, narrativity
David Bell[37] has raised interesting questions on worldviews for the designers of superintelligences –
machines much smarter than humans.  'Would they need worldviews, where would they get their worldviews
and what would they be like?'. The answers would have to relate to, for example, Christian worldviews. Some

7 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

of the people who consider features of superintelligences say they will have characteristics that are often
associated with divinity, raising big open questions for Christian believers. For example, very advanced
machines could, perhaps,   ultimately engender in people are terrified reverence and mystical awe in the light
of, say, an artificial agent's impressive understanding of the human condition. And perhaps some humans
might even be induced to 'worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator'? On the other hand what
would the agent's relationship to God be? Anyone attempting to accommodate concepts such as an
omnipotent, personal creator's sacrificial, emotional, spiritual and attitudinal demands being made of any
man-made entity, superintelligent or not, could be said to have strayed into terra prohibita theologically, of
course. And how would the worldviews of any superintelligences handle the relationships with what it might
regard as its human 'creator'?

See also
Attitude polarization Eschatology Mythology Schema
Basic beliefs Extrospection Norm (social) (psychology)
Belief Framing (social Ontology Scientific modeling
Belief networks sciences) Organizing principle Scientism
Christian worldview Ideology Paradigm Set (psychology)
Cognitive bias Life stance Perspective Social justice
Conformity Mental model Philosophy Social reality
Contemplation Mental Psycholinguistics Socially constructed
representation reality
Context (language Reality
use) Metaknowledge Subjective logic
Reality tunnel
Cultural bias Metanarrative Truth
Received view
Cultural identity Metaphysics Umwelt
Religion
Mindset Value system

References
1. "world-view noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes - Oxford Advanced Learner's
Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com" (https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition
/english/world-view). www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com.
2. Palmer, Gary B. (1996). Toward A Theory of Cultural Linguistics. University of Texas Press. p. 114.
ISBN 978-0-292-76569-6.
3. "Online Etymology Dictionary" (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=worldview). Etymonline.com.
Retrieved 2012-08-13.
4. Fadul, Jose (2014). Encyclopedia of Theory and Practice in Psychotherapy and Counseling
(https://books.google.co.in/books?id=WRrzBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA347&lpg=PA347&
dq=Edward+Sapir+also+gives+an+account+of+the+relationship+between+thinking+and+speaking+in+E
nglish&source=bl&ots=ObjouuV9rd&sig=RdD1S6ILO_XYWERUl0fB48KL5xk&hl=en&sa=X&
ved=0ahUKEwictcjAoJTRAhVIpI8KHbCdDk4Q6AEIGTAA#v=onepage&
q=Edward%20Sapir%20also%20gives%20an%20account%20of%20the%20relationship%20between%2
0thinking%20and%20speaking%20in%20English&f=false). p. 347. ISBN 978-1-312-34920-9.
5. Kay, P.; Kempton, W. (1984). "What is the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis?". American Anthropologist. 86 (1):
65–79. doi:10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050 (https://doi.org/10.1525%2Faa.1984.86.1.02a00050).
JSTOR 679389 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/679389).
6. "Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics" (https://web.archive.org/web/20040909044414/http:
//www.mpi.nl/world/). Archived from the original (http://www.mpi.nl/world/) on September 9, 2004.
Retrieved September 8, 2004.

8 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

7. Hiebert, Paul G. Transforming Worldviews: an anthropological understanding of how people change.

Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2008
8. Whorf, Benjamin Lee (1964) [1st pub. 1956]. Carroll, John Bissell, ed. Language, Thought, and Reality.
Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (https://books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&
printsec=frontcover). Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
ISBN 978-0-262-73006-8. Pp. 25 (https://books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&pg=PA25&
dq=%22map+or+plan+of+an+actual+realm+of+ideas%22), 36 (https://books.google.com
/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&pg=PA36&dq=%22stock+of+conceptions+common+to+people%22), 29-30
(https://books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&q=%22environmental+conditions%22), 242
(https://books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&pg=PA242&dq=%22language+family%22), 248
(https://books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QC&pg=PA248&dq=music).
9. Schimel, J., Hayes, J., Williams, T., & Jahrig, J. (2007). Is Death Really the Worm at the Core?
Converging Evidence that Worldview Threat Increases Death-Thought Accessibility. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 92, No. 5, pp. 789-803.
10. Goldenberg, J. L., Cox, C. R., Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (2002). Understanding
human ambivalence about sex: The effects of stripping sex of meaning. Journal of Sex Research, 39,
310–320.
11. Indeed Kitaro's final book is Last Writings: Nothingness and the Religious Worldview
12. David K. Naugle Worldview: The History of a Concept ISBN 0-8028-4761-7 page 4
13. James W. Sire The Universe Next Door: A Basic World view Catalog p15–16 (text readable at
Amazon.com)
14. Zayed, Tareq M. "History of emancipatory worldview of Muslim learners" (https://www.academia.edu
/9631989/History_of_emancipatory_worldview_of_Muslim_learners).
15. Not just in the obvious sense that you need axioms to prove anything, but the fact that for example the
Axiom of choice and Axiom S5, although widely regarded as correct, were in some sense optional.
16. see Godel's incompleteness theorem and discussion in e.g. John Lucas's The Freedom of the Will
17. Thus Alister McGrath in The Science of God p 109 citing in particular Alasdair MacIntyre's Whose
Justice? Which Rationality? – he also cites Nicholas Wolterstorff and Paul Feyerabend
18. "Governments in a democracy do not grant the fundamental freedoms enumerated by Jefferson;
governments are created to protect those freedoms that every individual possesses by virtue of his or her
existence. In their formulation by the Enlightenment philosophers of the 17th and 18th centuries,
inalienable rights are God-given natural rights. These rights are not destroyed when civil society is
created, and neither society nor government can remove or "alienate" them."US Gov website on
democracy (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem/whatdm3.htm) Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20081201190718/http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem
/whatdm3.htm) December 1, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.
19. Kenneth Jacobs (1970) "Bridging the gap between relativity and the undergraduate", Physics Today
23(12):48,8 doi:10.1063/1.3021868 (https://doi.org/10.1063%2F1.3021868)
20. see Owen Flanagan's 'The Problem of the Soul', 2002
21. see especially Daniel Dennett's 'Freedom Evolves', 2003
22. Diederik Aerts, Leo Apostel, Bart de Moor, Staf Hellemans, Edel Maex, Hubert van Belle & Jan van der
Veken (1994) ""World views. From Fragmentation to Integration (http://www.vub.ac.be/CLEA/pub/books
/worldviews.pdf)" VUB Press. Translation of (Apostel and Van der Veken 1991) with some additions. –
The basic book of World Views, from the Center Leo Apostel.
23. Muller, Roland (2001). Honor and Shame. Xlibris; 1st edition. ISBN 0738843164.
24. "Three Colors of Worldview" (http://www.knowledgeworkx.com/articles/three-colors-of-worldview).
KnowledgeWorkx. Retrieved 2016-02-25.
25. Blankenbugh, Marco (2013). Inter-Cultural Intelligence: From Surviving to Thriving in the Global Space.
BookBaby. ISBN 9781483511528.

9 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

26. Lind, Michael (12 January 2011). "The five worldviews that define American politics"
(http://www.salon.com/2011/01/12/lind_five_worldviews/). Salon Magazine. Retrieved 16 December
2016.
27. see e.g. Daniel Hill and Randal Rauser Christian Philosophy A–Z Edinburgh University Press (2006)
ISBN 978-0-7486-2152-1 p200
28. In the Christian tradition this goes back at least to Justin Martyr's Dialogues with Trypho, A Jew, and has
roots in the debates recorded in the New Testament For a discussion of the long history of religious
dialogue in India, see Amartya Sen's The Argumentative Indian
29. Cognitive Relativism, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/cog-rel.htm#H5)
30. The problem of self-refutation is quite general. It arises whether truth is relativized to a framework of
concepts, of beliefs, of standards, of practices.Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(http://www.science.uva.nl/~seop/entries/relativism/)
31. The Friesian School on Relativism (http://www.friesian.com/relative.htm)
32. Pope Benedict warns against relativism (http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=49207)
33. Ratzinger, J. Relativism, the Central Problem for Faith Today (http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA
/RATZRELA.HTM)
34. Jøsang, Audun (2001). "A Logic For Uncertain Probabilities". International Journal of Uncertainty,
Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems. 9 (3): 279–311. doi:10.1142/S0218488501000831
(https://doi.org/10.1142%2FS0218488501000831).
35. Ninian Smart Worldviews: Crosscultural Explorations of Human Beliefs (3rd Edition) ISBN 0-13-020980-5
p14
36. Vidal, Clément (2012). "Metaphilosophical Criteria for Worldview Comparison"
(http://homepages.vub.ac.be/%7Eclvidal/writings/Vidal-Metaphilosophical-Criteria.pdf) (PDF).
Metaphilosophy. 43 (3): 306–347. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01749.x (https://doi.org
/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9973.2012.01749.x).
37. BELL, DAVID (2016). SUPERINTELLIGENCE AND WORLD VIEWS (https://www.worldcat.org
/oclc/962016344). Guildford, Surrey, UK: GROSVENOR House PUBLISHING. ISBN 9781786237668.
OCLC 962016344 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/962016344).

External links
GLOGO - Global Governance System for Planet Earth at think tank Gold Mercury International
(http://www.goldmercury.org/centres/#glogo)
Apostel, Leo and Van der Veken, Jan. (1991) Wereldbeelden, DNB/Pelckmans.
Wikibook:The scientific world view
Wiki Worldview Themes: A Structure for Characterizing and Analyzing Worldviews
(http://www.projectworldview.org/wikiworldviewthemes.htm) includes links to nearly 400 Wikipedia articles
"You are what you speak" (https://web.archive.org/web/20090920230544/http://cognation.stanford.edu
/press/newscientist.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original on 2009-09-20.  (5.15 MB) – a 2002 essay on
research in linguistic relativity (Lera Boroditsky)
"Cobern, W. World View, Metaphysics, and Epistemology" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303174819
/http://www.wmich.edu/slcsp/SLCSP106/SLCSP106.PDF) (PDF). Archived from the original on
2016-03-03.  (50.3 KB)
inTERRAgation.com—A documentary project. Collecting and evaluating answers to "the meaning of life"
from around the world. (http://www.inTERRAgation.com)
The God Contention—Comparing various worldviews, faiths, and religions through the eyes of their
advocates. (http://www.godcontention.org)
Cole, Graham A., Do Christians have a Worldview? (http://henrycenter.tiu.edu/resource/do-christians-
have-a-worldview/) A paper examining the concept of worldview as it relates to and has been used by
Christianity. Contains a helpful annotated bibliography.
World View article on the Principia Cybernetica Project (http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/WORLVIEW.html)
Pogorskiy, E. (2015). Using personalisation to improve the effectiveness of global educational projects.

10 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32
World view - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view

E-Learning and Digital Media, 12(1), 57–67. (http://ldm.sagepub.com/content/12/1/57)

Worldviews – An Introduction (http://www.projectworldview.org/worldviews.htm) from Project Worldview
"Studies on World Views Related to Science" (list of suggested books and resources)
(http://www.asa3.org/asa/topics/worldview/index.html) from the American Scientific Affiliation (a Christian
perspective)
Eugene Webb, Worldview and Mind: Religious Thought and Psychological Development.
(https://web.archive.org/web/20100113045231/http://press.umsystem.edu/spring2009/webb.htm)
Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press, 2009.
Benjamin Gal-Or, “Cosmology, Physics and Philosophy”, Springer Verlag, 1981, 1983, 1987,
ISBN 0-387-90581-2, ISBN 0-387-96526-2.
Беляев И.А. Человек и его мироотношение. Сообщение 1. Мироотношение и мировоззрение /
И.А. Беляев // Политематический сетевой электронный научный журнал Кубанского
государственного аграрного университета (Научный журнал КубГАУ) [Электронный ресурс]. –
Краснодар: КубГАУ, 2011. – №09(73). С. 310 – 319. – Режим доступа: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2011/09
/pdf/29.pdf (http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17087744).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=World_view&oldid=839160648"

This page was last edited on 1 May 2018, at 17:27.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By
using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

11 of 11 02/05/18, 18:32