Worldview

[Kfox]

Everyone has a philosophy that governs their life. But not everyone is so introspective that they are consciously aware of it. You say you have "various philosophies." These would be the building blocks of your world view.

How are you describing a world view?

 

[Kfox]

Answer given.

How can you call this a straw man when at this point I am the only one who has asked a question? Remember; a straw man is me avoiding answering somebody else’s question.

Ahem. First attempted strawman.

What question was asked that I neglected to respond to?

Strawman burned.

Okay. Seems to have accepted the loss of the stawman.

Again; I’m asking a question in reference to an answer he provided me. A straw man would be MY response to HIS question!

Oops. I spoke too soon.
Second attempted strawman.

Again; here I am asking him another question;

Do I need to point out the others. There are too many.
Yes, you avoided the opponent's actual argument and instead argues against an inaccurate caricature of it.
Or maybe you just don't understand.

Nope. You're building strawman... plural.

Explain how any of my responses and questions are a caricature of any of the points that were made.

 

[Kfox]

...and there is the clincher.

You call that a clincher? Here I asked a specific question, and you responded by answering a different question than the one I asked, and completely ignored the one question that I did ask. Yet YOU accuse ME of straw manning? (LOL)

MO confirmed. Equating religion with opinion, and trying to contrast atheistic worldviews with that.
Gotcha.

Give an example of me equating religion with opinion.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

How are you describing a world view?

You literally just quoted me describing what a world view is.

 

[Kfox]

You literally just quoted me describing what a world view is.

Yes you did. Several posts back you said it is our philosophy on life. I guess with my various philosophies on the various experiences of life, it sorta goes in line with what others have said that they all make up a single world view. Some examples were like naturalism, religion, even political ideologies; I’ve heard some say it’s sorta a lens that we see everything through; I guess different people will have different descriptions. How ever, I appreciate you answering my question.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why would you need to change all that stuff about your life if the big bang theory is dis proven?

My belief is that at the time of 'inflation' (exponential expansion of the universe in its very early stage), there was nothing other than 'physical energy' in the universe. And that all things that exist today are none other than 'physical energy'. I equate that to Brahman of my religion (Advaita HInduism - non-duality). I take Brahman to be the stuff of the universe, something like 'star dust', and not as God. If non-duality is proved false, then my world view crashes. However,at the moment, I do not see any danger of that.

 

[Kfox]

My belief is that at the time of 'inflation' (exponential expansion of the universe in its very early stage), there was nothing other than 'physical energy' in the universe. And that all things that exist today are none other than 'physical energy'. I equate that to Brahman of my religion (Advait HInduism - non-duality). I take Brahman to be the stuff of the universe, something like 'star dust', and not as God. If non-duality is proved false, then my world view crashes. At the moment, I do not see any danger of that.

Okay that make sense; thanks for your perspective.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What is a worldview? And is this something that only applies to religious people?

I feel it's one of those buzzwords that doesn't actually mean anything in and of itself without proper context.

When asked "what is your worldview", my answer is always "regarding what?"

 

[Kfox]

I feel it's one of those buzzwords that doesn't actually mean anything in and of itself without proper context.

When asked "what is your worldview", my answer is always "regarding what?"

From what I've heard here, the answer would be concerning everything because a worldview covers everything.
The way it was explained to me is that a world view is like a lens that all of your beliefs are filtered through. Sorta like how rose colored glasses colors everything you see, a worldview will color everything you believe. A religious person might have their religion as their world view meaning all of their views; be it politics, morality, art, music, comedy, style, even food; is gonna be filtered through the tenants of their religious doctrine. Now as a non believer, I don’t have such a lens, but I know a lot of religious people who do, that’s why I asked if it was strictly a religious thing or not. Anyway; that’s why I asked the question here; to get a different perspective,

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

From what I've heard here, the answer would be concerning everything because a worldview covers everything.
The way it was explained to me is that a world view is like a lens that all of your beliefs are filtered through. Sorta like how rose colored glasses colors everything you see, a worldview will color everything you believe. A religious person might have their religion as their world view meaning all of their views; be it politics, morality, art, music, comedy, style, even food; is gonna be filtered through the tenants of their religious doctrine. Now as a non believer, I don’t have such a lens, but I know a lot of religious people who do, that’s why I asked if it was strictly a religious thing or not. Anyway; that’s why I asked the question here; to get a different perspective,

Interesting.

I also don't feel like I have such a "central" lens. Instead I seem to more have several lenses and context would decide which lens to pick.
I also think it's interesting how this gives new perspective to the idea that following a certain religion makes one narrow minded...
Having only one "central" lens seems quite fitting to the idea of narrowmindedness somehow

 

[nPeace]

How can you call this a straw man when at this point I am the only one who has asked a question? Remember; a straw man is me avoiding answering somebody else’s question.

I did not call your initial question a strawman. ...and no. A straw man is not just you avoiding answering somebody else’s question. That's being evasive.
You said it yourself. A straw man argument is when the person avoids the opponent's actual argument and instead argues against an inaccurate caricature of it.

So, I tell you orange juice is good for your health. You tell me 'So orange juice burning the eyes is good for you'. Strawman.

What question was asked that I neglected to respond to?

Argument - answer to your question that covered it, but wasn't what you wanted to hear. So you tried to get around it.

Again; I’m asking a question in reference to an answer he provided me. A straw man would be MY response to HIS question!

Based on how you respond, yes.

Again; here I am asking him another question;

A question that argues against an inaccurate caricature of the answer given.

Explain how any of my responses and questions are a caricature of any of the points that were made.

Okay.
The response to your question was, "A worldview is not an opinion, but can be opinions - that is, an accumulation of opinions."
Your response was, "So multiple opinions would be multiple worldviews".

You were just told an opinion is not a worldview, and you took the response that opinions make up your worldview, and created an inaccurate caricature of it, to argue against it. Namely - an opinion = a worldview, because 10 opinions = 10 worldviews.
Which is false, and not what was said. Therefore an inaccurate caricature of what was actual said by the person.

That's clear, I hope.

You call that a clincher? Here I asked a specific question, and you responded by answering a different question than the one I asked, and completely ignored the one question that I did ask. Yet YOU accuse ME of straw manning? (LOL)

I wasn't responding to any question. None was asked of me.
You asked so many questions though, I don't know why you would think I was responding to a specific one.
I'm merely addressing the OP, and trying to help you understand that... and answering your question.
Kfox said:
What part of your worldview is different from your opinion?

Regarding your specific ones. Which one is?
Can you give an example of a worldview that does not include religion?
I was asking for an example of a worldview that is not based on opinion; you gave examples of opinions that are not based on ones worldview

Give an example of me equating religion with opinion.

I just did. A second time.
An example that does not include religion = is not based on opinion.

Or, are you saying you asked the first question, but then decided to forget that, and ask a different question.
You were asking two different questions then?

 

[Quintessence]

Interesting.

I also don't feel like I have such a "central" lens. Instead I seem to more have several lenses and context would decide which lens to pick.
I also think it's interesting how this gives new perspective to the idea that following a certain religion makes one narrow minded...
Having only one "central" lens seems quite fitting to the idea of narrowmindedness somehow

So you're a paradigm shifter. Welcome to the club. Though it's a bit unfair to call those that aren't narrow-minded, IMHO.

Nevertheless, being a paradigm shifter doesn't mean you don't have a "central" or "default" lens. One can't not have one of those - it's the product of being oneself and contained within the confines of one's own body/mind/spirit/self. No matter how good one is at paradigm shifting, one cannot be anything other than oneself. Worldview is inseparable from our identities - it's how we see/think/view/understand. Like identities, it is not fixed or stagnant and one may try on a new fashion every now and again, but there's going to be some sort of clothing and style preferences in there. Having those preferences doesn't make one narrow-minded either. It just is.

 

[Bthoth]

Mankind is defining itself.

 

[Kfox]

I did not call your initial question a strawman

You didn’t? So what did you mean on post #79 when you said “Answer given” in reference to my initial question?

. ...and no. A straw man is not just you avoiding answering somebody else’s question. That's being evasive.
You said it yourself. A straw man argument is when the person avoids the opponent's actual argument and instead argues against an inaccurate caricature of it.

So, I tell you orange juice is good for your health. You tell me 'So orange juice burning the eyes is good for you'. Strawman.

Again; at that point, you didn’t tell me anything, I was asking my initial question! Care to try again?

Argument - answer to your question that covered it, but wasn't what you wanted to hear. So you tried to get around it.

No; I wanna hear the exact question that was asked that I neglected to respond to

A question that argues against an inaccurate caricature of the answer given.


Okay.
The response to your question was, "A worldview is not an opinion, but can be opinions - that is, an accumulation of opinions."
Your response was, "So multiple opinions would be multiple worldviews".

You were just told an opinion is not a worldview, and you took the response that opinions make up your worldview, and created an inaccurate caricature of it, to argue against it. Namely - an opinion = a worldview, because 10 opinions = 10 worldviews.
Which is false, and not what was said. Therefore an inaccurate caricature of what was actual said by the person.

That's clear, I hope.

That was not a caricature, I was just trying to get a clear understanding of what he was talking about.

I wasn't responding to any question. None was asked of me.

I asked you for an example of worldview that is not based on opinion, and you gave examples of opinions that are not your worldview remember?

 

[nPeace]

You didn’t? So what did you mean on post #79 when you said “Answer given” in reference to my initial question?

I meant your initial question was answered.

Again; at that point, you didn’t tell me anything, I was asking my initial question! Care to try again?

Try to explain what a strawman is? That was my simplest answer.

No; I wanna hear the exact question that was asked that I neglected to respond to

Why are you stuck on questions?
Argument. I said argument. The answer was given. Not a question. An argument. You responded to it with something that was not in keeping with what was said.

That was not a caricature, I was just trying to get a clear understanding of what he was talking about.

You were? You didn't understand this...
A worldview is a culmination of individual views of an individual.
Or this...

So worldview is just another word for "Opinion" agree?

'Opinions' perhaps. Because a worldview often includes more than one.

You didn't understand any of those responses?
In that case, I apologize. You have my sympathy.

I asked you for an example of worldview that is not based on opinion, and you gave examples of opinions that are not your worldview remember?

Can you show me where you asked me that? I don't recall you asking me that question.

Was this the question, or was there another?
What part of your worldview is different from your opinion?
I answered this question. Perhaps you thought you asked me something else.

 

[RestlessSoul]

What is a worldview? And is this something that only applies to religious people?

It's how you view the world. Which is generally through the prism of one's culture, education, experience, beliefs, prejudices, fears and aspirations.


However one's worldview is framed btw, it's mostly an illusion of some kind - “Ever since we discovered that Earth is round and turns like a mad spinning-top, we have understood that reality is not as it appears to us.” ― Carlo Rovelli, Seven Brief Lessons on Physics

 

[Kfox]

I meant your initial question was answered.

Yes; the initial question was answered by several people. Different people gave different answers.

You were? You didn't understand this...
A worldview is a culmination of individual views of an individual.
Or this...

'Opinions' perhaps. Because a worldview often includes more than one.

You didn't understand any of those responses?
In that case, I apologize. You have my sympathy.

I understood what he said, but unfortunately what he said did not make sense to me, so I asked for clarification; in case he meant something a little different than what he actually said. In case you don’t remember; he said A world view is a culmination of lots of different views. I responded a culmination of different views are multiple, but a world view sounds singular. Now to me that sounds inconsistent; that world views (plural) should be used. But to him it makes perfect sense which is perfectly fine. I was looking for his perspective and his perspective doesn’t have to make perfect sense to me. Now because I asked these questions does not mean I was attempting to straw man his response, I was just asking questions based on the response he gave.

Can you show me where you asked me that? I don't recall you asking me that question.

Post #45 I asked the question; which part of your worldview is not based on opinion, and you responded saying many of your opinions are not your world view! I didn’t ask that question! I asked the opposite of that question.
Your response was akin to me asking what type of car is not a vehicle, and you respond that lots of vehicles are not cars; giving examples of tractors, trains, motorcycles and countless other machines are vehicles but not cars.

 

[nPeace]

Yes; the initial question was answered by several people. Different people gave different answers.

I understood what he said, but unfortunately what he said did not make sense to me, so I asked for clarification; in case he meant something a little different than what he actually said. In case you don’t remember; he said A world view is a culmination of lots of different views. I responded a culmination of different views are multiple, but a world view sounds singular. Now to me that sounds inconsistent; that world views (plural) should be used. But to him it makes perfect sense which is perfectly fine. I was looking for his perspective and his perspective doesn’t have to make perfect sense to me. Now because I asked these questions does not mean I was attempting to straw man his response, I was just asking questions based on the response he gave.

I understand and sympathize with you.

Post #45 I asked the question; which part of your worldview is not based on opinion, and you responded saying many of your opinions are not your world view! I didn’t ask that question! I asked the opposite of that question.

No. Read your question again. What you wrote is different to what's in your head.
What part of your worldview is different from your opinion? is not the same as "which part of your worldview is not based on opinion", and this question does not make sense, since it's like asking, which collection of your opinions, views, etc., is not based on opinion?

I answered the question you asked, by giving examples of the difference between a worldview and opinion.

A worldview is based on opinions. A worldview does not exist, where there are no opinions, or views... but who doesn't have opinions and views - an outlook on life? The dead.

Your response was akin to me asking what type of car is not a vehicle, and you respond that lots of vehicles are not cars; giving examples of tractors, trains, motorcycles and countless other machines are vehicles but not cars.

Actually, your question was akin to...
What vehicle is different from a motorcade?
I was trying to help you understand that while a motorcycle, bus, van, etc., are all vehicles, the vehicle is not the motorcade. Rather, the collection of vehicles, make up a motorcade.

 

[Kfox]

A worldview is based on opinions. A worldview does not exist, where there are no opinions, or views... but who doesn't have opinions and views - an outlook on life? The dead.

Okay; now you seem to be saying something different. Before philosophies, facts, opinions, observations were all listed as equal contributors of a world view, and when I asked if opinions and a worldview were the same, I was told in the same sense that a steering wheel and a car are the same. But you saying that a worldview does not exist where there are no opinions is something that makes perfect sense to me

 

[Audie]

Yes you did. Several posts back you said it is our philosophy on life. I guess with my various philosophies on the various experiences of life, it sorta goes in line with what others have said that they all make up a single world view. Some examples were like naturalism, religion, even political ideologies; I’ve heard some say it’s sorta a lens that we see everything through; I guess different people will have different descriptions. How ever, I appreciate you answering my question.

I don't often hear about " world view"
and then it is from religionists who
tend to use it as a cudgel, to the general of
"Your evolutionist/ materialist " etc world view
does not allow you to receive God unto your
hert".

Of course I see the world through female eyes
amd eperience. From a Chinese big city perspective

Etc.

Do I have a world view that precludes any
possibi,ity of seeing outside of some
" world view"?

Being human I share shortco ings with others.
But I truly hope my brain never fossilizes
to a point that I am not ready to, cannot
step outside the box and see thecworld in
some radical new way.

This in 180 degree to Chridtian " wotldview" inwich
rigid clinging to beliefs is not merely a highest
value / virtue, but essential to securing eternity.

So..." wordview" as such, is not a useful discussion for me to have with a religionist