Thursday, November 30, 2017

Worldview Matters IV: Life Motivation

Why Does Worldview Matter? The Impact of Worldview IV – Life Motivation


Worldview is the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and interpret the world and our place within it. Worldview develops in and flows through the heart, the center of the human person, and necessarily involves answers (propositional or narrative) to four questions: What is our nature? What is our world? What is our problem? What is our end? Every person possesses a worldview that provides an answer or set of answers to these core worldview questions, but these individual worldviews can be compiled under broad categories.

But why does worldview matter? How does worldview affect us? Why bother learning about it as a concept, and one’s own worldview specifically? What does it have to do with life? Simply put, worldview matters because one’s worldview affects everything that one thinks and does, through confirmation bias, experiential accommodation, the pool of live options, and life motivation. What about that last notion, of life motivation? How does worldview affect the way we live and move and have our being?

Worldview and Life Motivation.

Worldview impacts the way that we live. A worldview not only describes the world for us but also directs our life in the world. It not only gives us a perspective on how the world is (worldview’s descriptive function) but also acts as a guide for how the world ought to be and how we ought to live in the world (worldview’s normative function).

James Sire’s definition of worldview emphasizes the nature of worldview as a “fundamental orientation of the heart” and the place of worldview in providing the foundation on which “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). The worldview that we hold is not just an intellectual, rational construct. Rather, worldview is seated deep within us; it takes root in our hearts and then flows out of our hearts into what we think, say, and do. As Walsh and Middleton insist:

“A world view is never merely a vision of life. It is always a vision for life as well. Indeed, a vision of life, or world view, that does not actually lead a person or a people in a particular way of life is no world view at all. Our world view determines our values. It helps us interpret the world around us. It sorts out what is important from what is not, what is of highest value from what is least. . . . A world view, then, provides a model of the world which guides its adherents in the world. It stipulates how the world ought to be, and it thus advises how its adherents ought to conduct themselves in the world.” [Brian J. Walsh and J. Richard Middleton, The Transforming Vision: Shaping a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1984), 31-32.]

The Dutch theologian and educator Abraham Kuyper stressed the nature of Christianity as a total life system. Kuyper recognized that a Christian worldview was an all-encompassing, all-motivating system of thought and action. He thus wrote essays working out the implications of a Christian worldview in the areas of religion, politics, science, art, and the future. Kuyper famously insisted that “there is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!” [Abraham Kuyper, “Sphere Sovereignty,” cited in James D. Bratt, Abraham Kuyper, A Centennial Reader (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 488.] How might worldview affect life motivation? Let us briefly survey how a Christian worldview might impact three areas of life: art, science, and sex.

A Christian worldview holds that a transcendent God created the universe and everything within it out of absolute nothingness. God then created human beings in his image. As a result, Christians see human beings as inherently creative beings, granted the ability to create works of art just as God has created. Within a Christian worldview, therefore, commitment to artistic creation ought to flourish.

Christian worldview beliefs ought also to affect one’s understanding and acceptance of scientific theories and hypotheses. On the one hand, a Christian worldview holds that human beings are fallen creatures. The fall affects both will and mind, meaning that (a) fallen, unredeemed human beings will tend to create scientific hypotheses (or philosophical speculations) that ignore or undermine belief in God and (b) our human knowledge, including scientific knowledge, will always be incomplete and tentative. On the other hand, a Christian worldview affirms belief in a Creator God, who brought the universe into existence ex nihilo (out of nothingness). There was nothing; then God created, and there was something. Holding these two beliefs, a Christian scientist will necessarily reject any scientific hypothesis that suggests that the universe is either
eternal or self-created. Christians will eagerly explore the natural world to better understand God’s creation, but their investigation will be guided and informed by their worldview commitments.

Similarly, a Christian worldview will hold that God created human beings to enjoy sexual intimacy within the bounds of heterosexual marriage. Sexual patience (waiting for marriage) and fidelity (being faithful to one’s marriage partner) are thus highly valued as a natural outworking of the Christian view of human persons and sexuality. At the same time, the joys of faithful monogamous sexuality will be celebrated as one of God’s gifts to created human beings. Sex plays an important role not only in procreation but also in relational intimacy and pleasure between self-giving spouses.

Other worldviews provide life motivation to their adherents as well. Skye Johnson, a missionary to the Lozi tribe along the Zambezi River in Africa, shares how the Lozi worldview affects their interpersonal relationships. Skye notes the typical Western understanding of time, possessions, and knowledge, and contrasts them with the typical Lozi worldview. For Westerners, Skye argues, time and possessions are private, while knowledge is public (shared). Thus, if you have an appointment for lunch with a friend at 12:30 p.m., it is considered disrespectful and rude to show up forty-five minutes late. It is considered stealing if you “borrow” your neighbor’s vehicle on the basis that you needed transportation and they were not currently using it. On the other hand, if you know how to grow better vegetables in your garden (weeding, fertilizers, irrigation, etc.), it is appropriate and virtuous to share such knowledge with your neighbors to improve their ability to grow better produce.

The Lozi conceptions of time, possessions, and knowledge are inverted. Time and possessions are considered public (shared), while knowledge is private. Thus, it is not uncommon for Skye to arrive for a 9:00 a.m. visit with a Lozi woman only to have the woman wander in from the fields half an hour later, wash and eat breakfast, and then sit down to visit with Skye around 10:00. Their time is shared, so the Lozi have no conception of “wasting” a Western missionary’s time. Similarly, when Skye and her husband have three canoes resting on the beach outside their house, neighboring Lozi feel free to “borrow” the canoes for their own use. After all, there was no way that the two Johnsons could use three canoes on their own anyway! Possessions are considered shared; private property is somewhat of an unknown among the Lozi.

Knowledge, on the other hand, is considered private and can be coveted quite tightly. Thus, if one of a village chieftain’s multiple wives learns from a Westerner how to keep her family healthier by practicing basic hygiene, she does not share that knowledge with the other wives. Her special knowledge gives her power over them and enables increased access to and higher status with her husband. Accordingly, Skye argues, it is difficult to convince newly converted Lozi Christians to share their faith in Jesus with their fellow Lozi since knowledge of Jesus’ saving grace gives them a power not available to their non-Christian neighbors.

There are, then, at least three ways that worldview differences are played out within the Lozi tribe. First, time-bound appointments are simply not considered; they are not a part of the cultural lexicon. Second, other people’s “stuff” is free for your own use, even without seeking permission. Third, one does not share new knowledge with others; one keeps it to oneself. Worldview considerations have significant play in the day-to-day life motivation of Lozi tribespeople.

David Naugle notes that our worldview presuppositions, “though mostly hidden, and often ignored, . . . guide and direct most, if not all, of life.” [David K. Naugle, Worldview: The History of a Concept (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 272.] Our worldview is influenced and shaped
by formative sociocultural influences. Once established, however, the worldview lodging within our hearts gives shape to our values and actions. The fourth core worldview question (what is our end?) has to do with purpose, meaning, destination, and values. A person’s conception of purpose and meaning in life is going to give strong direction to that person’s words and deeds. If the goal of life is to accumulate personal wealth, one is likely to spend a great deal of time working and seeking to earn more money. If the goal of life is eternal life with God, money is liable to take a backseat to relationship with God. Thus, worldview affects our goals, orientations, and actions in life.

Worldview even affects the questions that we ask. For example, one of the most prominent age-old philosophical, theological, and anthropological questions is, what happens to us after we die? John Dominic Crossan answers this age-old philosophical question about mortality quite simply: “Do I personally believe in an afterlife? No, but to be honest, I do not find it a particularly important question one way or the other.” [John Dominic Crossan and Richard G. Watts, Who Is Jesus: Answers to Your Questions About the Historical Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 131.] Crossan’s disinterest in postmortem fate is determined by his worldview
presumption that life absolutely ceases at death. As an analogy, consider someone who believes that God created the universe and created life on earth but nowhere else in the universe. A clear implication of this fundamental worldview is that there is no life on other planets waiting to be contacted. As a result, if this person were asked, “What do you think life on other planets would look like? Would it be carbon-based like us? Or would it be something entirely different?,” the person would be entirely uninterested in the consequent discussion. Under this worldview, there is no life elsewhere, so speculating on the characteristics of life elsewhere would be nonsensical.

In my past few blog posts, I have noted the influence that worldview exerts on us through confirmation bias, experiential accommodation, the pool of live options, and life motivation. A logical conclusion from the noted influences of worldview is simple and straightforward: once a worldview is in place within the individual’s heart, the individual tends (all other things being equal) to preserve that worldview. That is, worldviews are inherently conservative. It is to this, the conservatism of worldviews, that I will turn in future blog posts!

For more on the influence of worldview, and all things worldview, check out:


Tawa J. Anderson, W. Michael Clark, and David K. Naugle, An Introduction to Christian Worldview: Pursuing God's Perspective in a Pluralistic World. IVP Academic, October 2017. 384 pp. Amazon link

No comments: