thank you so many of you are aware that we’re living in an unsettled times in
we’re living in an unsettled times in
we’re living in an unsettled times in many societies throughout the world we
many societies throughout the world we
many societies throughout the world we have a feeling that there’s increased
have a feeling that there’s increased
have a feeling that there’s increased polarization on the political level and
polarization on the political level and
polarization on the political level and this is particularly true in the United
this is particularly true in the United
this is particularly true in the United States where I come from where you may
States where I come from where you may
States where I come from where you may be aware that the long-simmering culture
be aware that the long-simmering culture
be aware that the long-simmering culture Wars of the last 20 years
Wars of the last 20 years
Wars of the last 20 years threatened to boil over under the
threatened to boil over under the
threatened to boil over under the current president now when people try to
current president now when people try to
current president now when people try to come up with a reason for why this
come up with a reason for why this
come up with a reason for why this polarization is taking place you more
polarization is taking place you more
polarization is taking place you more and more will hear the argument that at
and more will hear the argument that at
and more will hear the argument that at the root
the root
the root there are really two embittered
there are really two embittered
there are really two embittered worldviews that are engaged in a
worldviews that are engaged in a
worldviews that are engaged in a struggle on the one hand secular
struggle on the one hand secular
struggle on the one hand secular liberalism and on the other conservative
liberalism and on the other conservative
liberalism and on the other conservative or religious conservatism so I want to
or religious conservatism so I want to
or religious conservatism so I want to talk to you tonight about worldview this
talk to you tonight about worldview this
talk to you tonight about worldview this is a very versatile term it’s a term
is a very versatile term it’s a term
is a very versatile term it’s a term that is creeping up more and more in the
that is creeping up more and more in the
that is creeping up more and more in the media what makes it so unusual I think
media what makes it so unusual I think
media what makes it so unusual I think is that it’s able to convey both
is that it’s able to convey both
is that it’s able to convey both scientific rational understanding
scientific rational understanding
scientific rational understanding religious belief and political passion
religious belief and political passion
religious belief and political passion all three of those at the same time it
all three of those at the same time it
all three of those at the same time it seems that there’s no other term that is
seems that there’s no other term that is
seems that there’s no other term that is quite as adequate for describing both
quite as adequate for describing both
quite as adequate for describing both confrontations with radical Islamism and
confrontations with radical Islamism and
confrontations with radical Islamism and also struggles within the United States
also struggles within the United States
also struggles within the United States between Republicans and Democrats so I
between Republicans and Democrats so I
between Republicans and Democrats so I do want to talk about worldview but I’ll
do want to talk about worldview but I’ll
do want to talk about worldview but I’ll let you know straight off that I’m quite
let you know straight off that I’m quite
let you know straight off that I’m quite suspicious of the term worldview I think
suspicious of the term worldview I think
suspicious of the term worldview I think that if I posed the question what’s in a
that if I posed the question what’s in a
that if I posed the question what’s in a worldview my first answer would be
worldview my first answer would be
worldview my first answer would be hidden assumptions and what I want to
hidden assumptions and what I want to
hidden assumptions and what I want to explore with you tonight are what are
explore with you tonight are what are
explore with you tonight are what are the the hidden assumptions that have
the the hidden assumptions that have
the the hidden assumptions that have been deposited in worldview over the
been deposited in worldview over the
been deposited in worldview over the course of its 200 year history so I’m
course of its 200 year history so I’m
course of its 200 year history so I’m going to take a brief journey through
going to take a brief journey through
going to take a brief journey through the history of worldview and try to
the history of worldview and try to
the history of worldview and try to uncover some of these assumptions with
uncover some of these assumptions with
uncover some of these assumptions with the aim not that you will come away with
the aim not that you will come away with
the aim not that you will come away with feeling I now know what my worldview is
feeling I now know what my worldview is
feeling I now know what my worldview is but rather I want you to question the
but rather I want you to question the
but rather I want you to question the very idea of worldview that’s my aim
very idea of worldview that’s my aim
very idea of worldview that’s my aim I want to offer you two particular
I want to offer you two particular
I want to offer you two particular points of entry into this topic on the
points of entry into this topic on the
points of entry into this topic on the one hand I want to explore the ways in
one hand I want to explore the ways in
one hand I want to explore the ways in which secular and religious actors have
which secular and religious actors have
which secular and religious actors have contributed to the invention of
contributed to the invention of
contributed to the invention of worldview but also have propelled its
worldview but also have propelled its
worldview but also have propelled its development over time and I think what’s
development over time and I think what’s
development over time and I think what’s interesting is that there are also
interesting is that there are also
interesting is that there are also hidden dialogues that go on between
hidden dialogues that go on between
hidden dialogues that go on between religious and secular actors through the
religious and secular actors through the
religious and secular actors through the term worldview the second thing that I
term worldview the second thing that I
term worldview the second thing that I want to talk to you about is the merger
want to talk to you about is the merger
want to talk to you about is the merger of politics and worldview if we talk
of politics and worldview if we talk
of politics and worldview if we talk about rise and fall of worldview we can
about rise and fall of worldview we can
about rise and fall of worldview we can say that under national socialism there
say that under national socialism there
say that under national socialism there is a rise of worldview in the twentieth
is a rise of worldview in the twentieth
is a rise of worldview in the twentieth century and that in the United States of
century and that in the United States of
century and that in the United States of the Cold War
the Cold War
the Cold War there’s the fall of worldview and now
there’s the fall of worldview and now
there’s the fall of worldview and now that we’re renters
that we’re renters
that we’re renters a rise of worldview the question is what
a rise of worldview the question is what
a rise of worldview the question is what does the history tell us or how can I
does the history tell us or how can I
does the history tell us or how can I help us the first point we have to talk
help us the first point we have to talk
help us the first point we have to talk about is the origin of worldview now
about is the origin of worldview now
about is the origin of worldview now worldview is not a concept that has
worldview is not a concept that has
worldview is not a concept that has already always existed I want you not to
already always existed I want you not to
already always existed I want you not to assume that just because it makes
assume that just because it makes
assume that just because it makes intuitive sense to us that we have a
intuitive sense to us that we have a
intuitive sense to us that we have a worldview right everyone sees the world
worldview right everyone sees the world
worldview right everyone sees the world in a certain way but the the idea of
in a certain way but the the idea of
in a certain way but the the idea of worldview is it was invented in the
worldview is it was invented in the
worldview is it was invented in the nineteenth century and it was invented
nineteenth century and it was invented
nineteenth century and it was invented in Germany and it comes from the term
in Germany and it comes from the term
in Germany and it comes from the term vet uncial now two things occurred in
vet uncial now two things occurred in
vet uncial now two things occurred in Germany at that time to give rise to
Germany at that time to give rise to
Germany at that time to give rise to worldview the first thing was a
worldview the first thing was a
worldview the first thing was a revolution in Natural Science we heard
revolution in Natural Science we heard
revolution in Natural Science we heard earlier about the Scientific Revolution
earlier about the Scientific Revolution
earlier about the Scientific Revolution of the Renaissance but what happens in
of the Renaissance but what happens in
of the Renaissance but what happens in the nineteenth century in Germany is
the nineteenth century in Germany is
the nineteenth century in Germany is that a group of natural scientists
that a group of natural scientists
that a group of natural scientists believed that it is possible to give a
believed that it is possible to give a
believed that it is possible to give a total description of the world
total description of the world
total description of the world from a few basic principles and here we
from a few basic principles and here we
from a few basic principles and here we see alexander von humboldt a german
see alexander von humboldt a german
see alexander von humboldt a german explorer and naturalist who writes a
explorer and naturalist who writes a
explorer and naturalist who writes a book called cosmos which is an attempt
book called cosmos which is an attempt
book called cosmos which is an attempt really at a first rough draft of this
really at a first rough draft of this
really at a first rough draft of this total history of the world through
total history of the world through
total history of the world through natural science and
one of the key elements of this
one of the key elements of this worldview is the notion of evolution so
worldview is the notion of evolution so
worldview is the notion of evolution so already before Darwin that Germans had
already before Darwin that Germans had
already before Darwin that Germans had it latched on to the idea of evolution
it latched on to the idea of evolution
it latched on to the idea of evolution and evolution provides a total model for
and evolution provides a total model for
and evolution provides a total model for all human life it all it derives and
all human life it all it derives and
all human life it all it derives and emerges and and develops further through
emerges and and develops further through
emerges and and develops further through evolution the evolutionary process and
evolution the evolutionary process and
evolution the evolutionary process and here we see the Tree of Life from a
here we see the Tree of Life from a
here we see the Tree of Life from a German author from the mid 19th century
German author from the mid 19th century
German author from the mid 19th century essentially it shows the totality of
essentially it shows the totality of
essentially it shows the totality of biological life in a single diagram that
biological life in a single diagram that
biological life in a single diagram that is world view and this is a worldview
is world view and this is a worldview
is world view and this is a worldview author the second thing that happens is
author the second thing that happens is
author the second thing that happens is that this total understanding of the
that this total understanding of the
that this total understanding of the world gets mobilized against religion
world gets mobilized against religion
world gets mobilized against religion what happens is that the advocates of
what happens is that the advocates of
what happens is that the advocates of this new natural scientific worldview
this new natural scientific worldview
this new natural scientific worldview argue that it has replaced the old world
argue that it has replaced the old world
argue that it has replaced the old world view of Christianity in the process of
view of Christianity in the process of
view of Christianity in the process of replacing Christianity advocates of the
replacing Christianity advocates of the
replacing Christianity advocates of the new world view believe that it takes on
new world view believe that it takes on
new world view believe that it takes on also the attributes previously held by
also the attributes previously held by
also the attributes previously held by Christianity it provides a morality it
Christianity it provides a morality it
Christianity it provides a morality it provides an explanation of where we come
provides an explanation of where we come
provides an explanation of where we come from and where we’re going and it
from and where we’re going and it
from and where we’re going and it provides meaning for life and here we
provides meaning for life and here we
provides meaning for life and here we see a painting of a revolutionary of
see a painting of a revolutionary of
see a painting of a revolutionary of 1848 robert bloom he was an advocate of
1848 robert bloom he was an advocate of
1848 robert bloom he was an advocate of the new world view also it engaged in
the new world view also it engaged in
the new world view also it engaged in the revolution and here he’s about to be
the revolution and here he’s about to be
the revolution and here he’s about to be executed for his his participation in
executed for his his participation in
executed for his his participation in the revolution and you’ll notice he’s
the revolution and you’ll notice he’s
the revolution and you’ll notice he’s raised up his hand against the Catholic
raised up his hand against the Catholic
raised up his hand against the Catholic priest he himself was a Catholic my
priest he himself was a Catholic my
priest he himself was a Catholic my background but he had now converted to
background but he had now converted to
background but he had now converted to the new world view and the message is I
the new world view and the message is I
the new world view and the message is I don’t need Christianity I’m secure in my
don’t need Christianity I’m secure in my
don’t need Christianity I’m secure in my secular worldview even at the moment of
secular worldview even at the moment of
secular worldview even at the moment of death okay
death okay
death okay so natural scientific worldview is
so natural scientific worldview is
so natural scientific worldview is essentially the first dominant worldview
essentially the first dominant worldview
essentially the first dominant worldview in Germany now if you look online at a
in Germany now if you look online at a
in Germany now if you look online at a online bookseller you will find if you
online bookseller you will find if you
online bookseller you will find if you type in worldview into the title search
type in worldview into the title search
type in worldview into the title search you will come up with something like a
you will come up with something like a
you will come up with something like a thousand titles maybe maybe more
thousand titles maybe maybe more
thousand titles maybe maybe more of those the majority are written by
of those the majority are written by
of those the majority are written by advocates of religious worldview in
advocates of religious worldview in
advocates of religious worldview in other words they were still propagating
other words they were still propagating
other words they were still propagating worldview as something they want to
worldview as something they want to
worldview as something they want to aspire to and that we should follow and
aspire to and that we should follow and
aspire to and that we should follow and within that group that by far the most
within that group that by far the most
within that group that by far the most numerous are advocates of what is known
numerous are advocates of what is known
numerous are advocates of what is known as Christian worldview now Christian
as Christian worldview now Christian
as Christian worldview now Christian worldview authors are largely white
worldview authors are largely white
worldview authors are largely white evangelicals from the United States so
evangelicals from the United States so
evangelicals from the United States so that’s an interesting fact how is it
that’s an interesting fact how is it
that’s an interesting fact how is it that a term originating in secularism is
that a term originating in secularism is
that a term originating in secularism is now most actively propagated by the most
now most actively propagated by the most
now most actively propagated by the most conservative branch of Protestantism in
conservative branch of Protestantism in
conservative branch of Protestantism in the United States to understand that
the United States to understand that
the United States to understand that transition we’ll have to go back to the
transition we’ll have to go back to the
transition we’ll have to go back to the period around 1900 and we now get a
period around 1900 and we now get a
period around 1900 and we now get a Dutch element to our story
Dutch element to our story
Dutch element to our story there’s a famous anthology in’ and
there’s a famous anthology in’ and
there’s a famous anthology in’ and politician abraham calper he said that
politician abraham calper he said that
politician abraham calper he said that the enemy had a vast army and that it
the enemy had a vast army and that it
the enemy had a vast army and that it had lined up a formation of fearsome
had lined up a formation of fearsome
had lined up a formation of fearsome formation on the battle line it had
formation on the battle line it had
formation on the battle line it had science universities political parties
science universities political parties
science universities political parties they were all united by worldview what
they were all united by worldview what
they were all united by worldview what christians needed was to match
christians needed was to match
christians needed was to match one-for-one the battle formation of the
one-for-one the battle formation of the
one-for-one the battle formation of the enemy and calper founded a university
enemy and calper founded a university
enemy and calper founded a university and they needed to unite it with what
and they needed to unite it with what
and they needed to unite it with what with worldview so he became an advocate
with worldview so he became an advocate
with worldview so he became an advocate of Christian worldview in the year 1900
of Christian worldview in the year 1900
of Christian worldview in the year 1900 around then now this is a picture I
around then now this is a picture I
around then now this is a picture I believe from the United States calper
believe from the United States calper
believe from the United States calper was very influential in American circles
was very influential in American circles
was very influential in American circles Protestant circles particularly
Protestant circles particularly
Protestant circles particularly fundamentalists and they took CalPERS
fundamentalists and they took CalPERS
fundamentalists and they took CalPERS idea of Christian worldview and
idea of Christian worldview and
idea of Christian worldview and developed out of it a very intelligent
developed out of it a very intelligent
developed out of it a very intelligent defense of the Bible what they said was
defense of the Bible what they said was
defense of the Bible what they said was that in the past Christians used to try
that in the past Christians used to try
that in the past Christians used to try to defend the Bible when attacked by
to defend the Bible when attacked by
to defend the Bible when attacked by non-believers on a kind of one by one
non-believers on a kind of one by one
non-believers on a kind of one by one basis they would if the non-believer
basis they would if the non-believer
basis they would if the non-believer would argue about miracles Christians
would argue about miracles Christians
would argue about miracles Christians would argue about miracles you know
would argue about miracles you know
would argue about miracles you know creation in seven days right people that
creation in seven days right people that
creation in seven days right people that have knowledge of geology and so on
have knowledge of geology and so on
have knowledge of geology and so on would say haha can’t possibly be true
would say haha can’t possibly be true
would say haha can’t possibly be true therefore the Bible is not true so the
therefore the Bible is not true so the
therefore the Bible is not true so the argument from worldview was the
argument from worldview was the
argument from worldview was the important thing when reading the Bible
important thing when reading the Bible
important thing when reading the Bible is your mindset with which you read it
is your mindset with which you read it
is your mindset with which you read it if you’re a Christian you are reading
if you’re a Christian you are reading
if you’re a Christian you are reading essentially a different Bible than the
essentially a different Bible than the
essentially a different Bible than the non-believer
non-believer
non-believer so that’s worldview right the Christian
so that’s worldview right the Christian
so that’s worldview right the Christian worldview gives you different
worldview gives you different
worldview gives you different presuppositions and necessarily leads to
presuppositions and necessarily leads to
presuppositions and necessarily leads to different conclusions you see a
different conclusions you see a
different conclusions you see a different reality so the argument is
different reality so the argument is
different reality so the argument is that secular and Christian worldviews
that secular and Christian worldviews
that secular and Christian worldviews cannot communicate with one another they
cannot communicate with one another they
cannot communicate with one another they are they are separate and they must
are they are separate and they must
are they are separate and they must remain separate in the interest of
remain separate in the interest of
remain separate in the interest of Christianity okay so that’s Christian
Christianity okay so that’s Christian
Christianity okay so that’s Christian worldview now what’s interesting to sum
worldview now what’s interesting to sum
worldview now what’s interesting to sum up my first point tonight is that we see
up my first point tonight is that we see
up my first point tonight is that we see that secular worldview is only possible
that secular worldview is only possible
that secular worldview is only possible out of a critique of religion but that
out of a critique of religion but that
out of a critique of religion but that Christian worldview or religion
Christian worldview or religion
Christian worldview or religion worldview in general if you use the term
worldview in general if you use the term
worldview in general if you use the term worldview is really derived from
worldview is really derived from
worldview is really derived from secularism okay in some of its key
secularism okay in some of its key
secularism okay in some of its key assumptions obviously not in its
assumptions obviously not in its
assumptions obviously not in its theology so that that’s quite an
theology so that that’s quite an
theology so that that’s quite an interesting fact there there’s a mutual
interesting fact there there’s a mutual
interesting fact there there’s a mutual dependence if you so will on both of
dependence if you so will on both of
dependence if you so will on both of these understandings of worldview as
these understandings of worldview as
these understandings of worldview as revealed in history and I think actually
revealed in history and I think actually
revealed in history and I think actually there’s some hope in a contemporary
there’s some hope in a contemporary
there’s some hope in a contemporary culture wars for some type of dialogue
culture wars for some type of dialogue
culture wars for some type of dialogue on that basis alright now we come to our
on that basis alright now we come to our
on that basis alright now we come to our second point which is the merger of
second point which is the merger of
second point which is the merger of politics and worldview in the 20th
politics and worldview in the 20th
politics and worldview in the 20th century
century
century oops okay so here here is an image of
oops okay so here here is an image of
oops okay so here here is an image of American famous evangelical I think this
American famous evangelical I think this
American famous evangelical I think this is Billy Graham as a representative of
is Billy Graham as a representative of
is Billy Graham as a representative of the American embrace of Christian
the American embrace of Christian
the American embrace of Christian worldview now when we talk about
worldview now when we talk about
worldview now when we talk about political worldview we need to mention
political worldview we need to mention
political worldview we need to mention Adolf Hitler because National Socialism
Adolf Hitler because National Socialism
Adolf Hitler because National Socialism was in many way the absolute high point
was in many way the absolute high point
was in many way the absolute high point of the development of worldview Hitler
of the development of worldview Hitler
of the development of worldview Hitler never spoke or rarely spoke of national
never spoke or rarely spoke of national
never spoke or rarely spoke of national socialism as a philosophy or an ideology
socialism as a philosophy or an ideology
socialism as a philosophy or an ideology but always as a vet on shown as a
but always as a vet on shown as a
but always as a vet on shown as a worldview and he made an interesting
worldview and he made an interesting
worldview and he made an interesting innovation in the thinking about
innovation in the thinking about
innovation in the thinking about worldview in the process he said that
worldview in the process he said that
worldview in the process he said that the other people who talk about
the other people who talk about
the other people who talk about worldview the Christians and the
worldview the Christians and the
worldview the Christians and the secularists they make a mistake
secularists they make a mistake
secularists they make a mistake they always derive their idea of
they always derive their idea of
they always derive their idea of worldview from the truth okay they
worldview from the truth okay they
worldview from the truth okay they believe that truth is what makes
believe that truth is what makes
believe that truth is what makes worldview great Hitler said no what
worldview great Hitler said no what
worldview great Hitler said no what makes worldview great is its ability to
makes worldview great is its ability to
makes worldview great is its ability to unite the nation so the test of the
unite the nation so the test of the
unite the nation so the test of the worldview as an ideal is its ability to
worldview as an ideal is its ability to
worldview as an ideal is its ability to unite the nation against its enemies and
unite the nation against its enemies and
unite the nation against its enemies and for Hitler that was communists and Jews
for Hitler that was communists and Jews
for Hitler that was communists and Jews so Hitler looks back in history and said
so Hitler looks back in history and said
so Hitler looks back in history and said when was Germany last united by a
when was Germany last united by a
when was Germany last united by a worldview properly
worldview properly
worldview properly he said medieval Christianity the
he said medieval Christianity the
he said medieval Christianity the medieval church managed it but then the
medieval church managed it but then the
medieval church managed it but then the Reformation came along separated
Reformation came along separated
Reformation came along separated Protestants from Catholics and world and
Protestants from Catholics and world and
Protestants from Catholics and world and religion from that point on became what
religion from that point on became what
religion from that point on became what divided Germans rather than United them
divided Germans rather than United them
divided Germans rather than United them so Hitler said if Germany is going to be
so Hitler said if Germany is going to be
so Hitler said if Germany is going to be reunited it has to be reunited under a
reunited it has to be reunited under a
reunited it has to be reunited under a secular worldview one that can fight
secular worldview one that can fight
secular worldview one that can fight Marxism and that’s what he offered as
Marxism and that’s what he offered as
Marxism and that’s what he offered as National Socialism so we can say that
National Socialism so we can say that
National Socialism so we can say that the rise of worldview the zenith of
the rise of worldview the zenith of
the rise of worldview the zenith of worldview is national socialism the
worldview is national socialism the
worldview is national socialism the Second World War in many ways is a war
Second World War in many ways is a war
Second World War in many ways is a war of worldviews right certainly as far as
of worldviews right certainly as far as
of worldviews right certainly as far as as Marxism and national socialism are
as Marxism and national socialism are
as Marxism and national socialism are concerned but what if the third party to
concerned but what if the third party to
concerned but what if the third party to the conflict in Europe right what about
the conflict in Europe right what about
the conflict in Europe right what about the liberal democracies the United
the liberal democracies the United
the liberal democracies the United States and the UK do they have a
States and the UK do they have a
States and the UK do they have a worldview right is liberal democracy a
worldview right is liberal democracy a
worldview right is liberal democracy a worldview it’s an important question
worldview it’s an important question
worldview it’s an important question especially today now at the end of the
especially today now at the end of the
especially today now at the end of the at the end of the cold or the sorry at
at the end of the cold or the sorry at
at the end of the cold or the sorry at the beginning of the Cold War there were
the beginning of the Cold War there were
the beginning of the Cold War there were a group of American and European liberal
a group of American and European liberal
a group of American and European liberal intellectuals who pondered this question
intellectuals who pondered this question
intellectuals who pondered this question and they said that the answer is no
and they said that the answer is no
and they said that the answer is no liberal democracy does not have a
liberal democracy does not have a
liberal democracy does not have a worldview moreover the lack of a
worldview moreover the lack of a
worldview moreover the lack of a worldview in liberal democracy is what
worldview in liberal democracy is what
worldview in liberal democracy is what makes liberal democracies superior to
makes liberal democracies superior to
makes liberal democracies superior to all the other political systems so the
all the other political systems so the
all the other political systems so the what they said was that America in
what they said was that America in
what they said was that America in particular had a specific intellectual
particular had a specific intellectual
particular had a specific intellectual tradition which had on the one hand
tradition which had on the one hand
tradition which had on the one hand pluralism and on the other pragmatism so
pluralism and on the other pragmatism so
pluralism and on the other pragmatism so what that meant in the political realm
what that meant in the political realm
what that meant in the political realm was that you would have a multitude of
was that you would have a multitude of
was that you would have a multitude of voices pluralism but they had to then
voices pluralism but they had to then
voices pluralism but they had to then engage in some kind of dialogue or
engage in some kind of dialogue or
engage in some kind of dialogue or debate or a scientific investigation to
debate or a scientific investigation to
debate or a scientific investigation to arrive at pragmatic solutions to
arrive at pragmatic solutions to
arrive at pragmatic solutions to pragmatic understandings of truth at the
pragmatic understandings of truth at the
pragmatic understandings of truth at the end and they argued that that was the
end and they argued that that was the
end and they argued that that was the very antithesis of worldview right
very antithesis of worldview right
very antithesis of worldview right worldview is a total system of
worldview is a total system of
worldview is a total system of explanation pragmatism pluralism are the
explanation pragmatism pluralism are the
explanation pragmatism pluralism are the antithesis they were so confident of
antithesis they were so confident of
antithesis they were so confident of their position that in the year 1960 a
their position that in the year 1960 a
their position that in the year 1960 a book was published called the end of
book was published called the end of
book was published called the end of ideology and it also clearly refers to
ideology and it also clearly refers to
ideology and it also clearly refers to the end of world view so they believed
the end of world view so they believed
the end of world view so they believed worldview was over in 1960 okay and
worldview was over in 1960 okay and
worldview was over in 1960 okay and here’s an image of I don’t know what
here’s an image of I don’t know what
here’s an image of I don’t know what this is I’m gonna guess hungry 1956
this is I’m gonna guess hungry 1956
this is I’m gonna guess hungry 1956 toppling a statue of Stalin but in a
toppling a statue of Stalin but in a
toppling a statue of Stalin but in a sense the sense of these Cold War
sense the sense of these Cold War
sense the sense of these Cold War liberals was that they had toppled those
liberals was that they had toppled those
liberals was that they had toppled those worldviews okay
worldviews okay
worldviews okay what is this teach us about America
what is this teach us about America
what is this teach us about America today okay I’m American I’m focusing on
today okay I’m American I’m focusing on
today okay I’m American I’m focusing on the United States here but I think
the United States here but I think
the United States here but I think that’s where these debates about world
that’s where these debates about world
that’s where these debates about world your most intense at present so what is
your most intense at present so what is
your most intense at present so what is the lesson of this historical tour for
the lesson of this historical tour for
the lesson of this historical tour for today in the United States now one of
today in the United States now one of
today in the United States now one of the things similar to the notion of
the things similar to the notion of
the things similar to the notion of Christian worldview that world views are
Christian worldview that world views are
Christian worldview that world views are separate and not supposed to mesh not
separate and not supposed to mesh not
separate and not supposed to mesh not supposed to arrive at some kind of
supposed to arrive at some kind of
supposed to arrive at some kind of common ground it’s not far from there to
common ground it’s not far from there to
common ground it’s not far from there to go to alternative facts now you may be
go to alternative facts now you may be
go to alternative facts now you may be aware of this statement that was made by
aware of this statement that was made by
aware of this statement that was made by the press the the spokeswoman of Trump
the press the the spokeswoman of Trump
the press the the spokeswoman of Trump in January of this year
in January of this year
in January of this year that Trump was offering alternative
that Trump was offering alternative
that Trump was offering alternative facts on in some dispute now alternative
facts on in some dispute now alternative
facts on in some dispute now alternative facts of course got a laugh at the time
facts of course got a laugh at the time
facts of course got a laugh at the time and some people were very irritated at
and some people were very irritated at
and some people were very irritated at this but it does make sense from the
this but it does make sense from the
this but it does make sense from the point of view of worldview all right
point of view of worldview all right
point of view of worldview all right because world views have alternative
because world views have alternative
because world views have alternative facts because they have alternative
facts because they have alternative
facts because they have alternative realities
realities
realities the other place we could look and say
the other place we could look and say
the other place we could look and say world view thinking is at work is the
world view thinking is at work is the
world view thinking is at work is the debate over climate change many
debate over climate change many
debate over climate change many conservatives who reject climate change
conservatives who reject climate change
conservatives who reject climate change in the United States are not looking to
in the United States are not looking to
in the United States are not looking to engage in a serious scientific debate
engage in a serious scientific debate
engage in a serious scientific debate over climate change but rather insist on
over climate change but rather insist on
over climate change but rather insist on the importance of the validity of their
the importance of the validity of their
the importance of the validity of their perspective right which is again
perspective right which is again
perspective right which is again worldview thinking at work so to
worldview thinking at work so to
worldview thinking at work so to conclude I think that there’s a point to
conclude I think that there’s a point to
conclude I think that there’s a point to be made by people that think with
be made by people that think with
be made by people that think with worldviews that the liberal press or
worldviews that the liberal press or
worldviews that the liberal press or liberals in general are sometimes a bit
liberals in general are sometimes a bit
liberals in general are sometimes a bit blind to their own ideological position
blind to their own ideological position
blind to their own ideological position and they tend to assume that their
and they tend to assume that their
and they tend to assume that their position is shared by everybody okay
position is shared by everybody okay
position is shared by everybody okay that is a good valid criticism however
that is a good valid criticism however
that is a good valid criticism however when you start to talk in terms of
when you start to talk in terms of
when you start to talk in terms of worldview dialogue tends to end and I do
worldview dialogue tends to end and I do
worldview dialogue tends to end and I do believe following the Cold War liberals
believe following the Cold War liberals
believe following the Cold War liberals that worldview talk is bad for democracy
that worldview talk is bad for democracy
that worldview talk is bad for democracy because why
because why
because why well the Cold War liberals said that
well the Cold War liberals said that
well the Cold War liberals said that pluralism is good but you can’t it’s not
pluralism is good but you can’t it’s not
pluralism is good but you can’t it’s not the endpoint it’s not enough to just say
the endpoint it’s not enough to just say
the endpoint it’s not enough to just say there are two sides to every issue you
there are two sides to every issue you
there are two sides to every issue you have to also connect pluralism to some
have to also connect pluralism to some
have to also connect pluralism to some kind of pragmatic search for a solution
kind of pragmatic search for a solution
kind of pragmatic search for a solution to problems or for some type of
to problems or for some type of
to problems or for some type of compromise and to my thinking whenever a
compromise and to my thinking whenever a
compromise and to my thinking whenever a worldview is invoked dialogue ends and
worldview is invoked dialogue ends and
worldview is invoked dialogue ends and and for that reason I want you to be my
and for that reason I want you to be my
and for that reason I want you to be my my suggestion that before you use
my suggestion that before you use
my suggestion that before you use worldview the next time you stop to
worldview the next time you stop to
worldview the next time you stop to consider the assumptions that go along
consider the assumptions that go along
consider the assumptions that go along with that term and the key assumption I
with that term and the key assumption I
with that term and the key assumption I believe is that thought that worldviews
believe is that thought that worldviews
believe is that thought that worldviews cannot engage in dialogue right but but
cannot engage in dialogue right but but
cannot engage in dialogue right but but my belief or my hope is that we can
my belief or my hope is that we can
my belief or my hope is that we can engage in dialogue and I think that that
engage in dialogue and I think that that
engage in dialogue and I think that that is what is needed at the current moment
is what is needed at the current moment
is what is needed at the current moment thank you
”
Be First to Comment