Editing Worldview (section)

==Comparison of worldviews==
{{See also|Social Axioms Survey}}
One can think of a worldview as comprising a number of [[basic belief]]s which are philosophically equivalent to the axioms of the worldview considered as a logical or consistent theory. These basic beliefs cannot, by definition, be proven (in the logical sense) within the worldview – precisely because they are [[axiom]]s, and are typically argued ''from'' rather than argued ''for''.<ref>See for example Daniel Hill and Randal Rauser: ''Christian Philosophy A–Z'' [[Edinburgh University Press]] (2006) {{ISBN|978-0-7486-2152-1}} p200</ref> 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.<ref>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''
</ref>

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 realist]]s.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://iep.utm.edu/cognitive-relativism-truth/|title=Cognitive Relativism &#124; Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref><ref>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.[http://www.science.uva.nl/~seop/entries/relativism/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]
</ref>
Additionally, religious believers might not wish to see their beliefs relativized into something that is only "true for them".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/RATZRELA.HTM|title=Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger|website=www.ewtn.com}}</ref>
[[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.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jøsang |first1=Audun |title=A Logic For Uncertain Probabilities |journal=International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems |date=21 November 2011 |volume=09 |issue=3 |pages=279–311 |doi=10.1142/S0218488501000831 |url=https://eprints.qut.edu.au/7204/1/Jos2001-IJUFKS.pdf }}</ref>{{clarify|date=May 2024}}

A third alternative sees the worldview approach as only a methodological relativism, as a suspension of 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."<ref>[[Ninian Smart]] ''Worldviews: Crosscultural Explorations of Human Beliefs (3rd Edition)'' {{ISBN|0-13-020980-5}} p14
</ref>

The comparison of religious, philosophical or scientific worldviews is a delicate endeavor, because such worldviews start from different [[presupposition]]s and cognitive values.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vidal |first1=Clément |title=Metaphilosophical Criteria for Worldview Comparison |journal=Metaphilosophy |date=April 2012 |volume=43 |issue=3 |pages=306–347 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01749.x |citeseerx=10.1.1.508.631 }}</ref> Clément Vidal has proposed metaphilosophical criteria for the comparison of worldviews, classifying them in three broad categories:

# ''objective'': objective consistency, scientificity, scope
# ''subjective'': subjective consistency, personal utility, emotionality
# ''intersubjective'': intersubjective consistency, collective utility, narrativity

=== 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 mind|unconscious]] way. For instance, if one's worldview is fixed by one's language, as according to a strong version of the [[Linguistic relativity|Sapir–Whorf hypothesis]], one would have to learn or invent a new language in order to construct a new worldview.

According to Apostel,<ref>[[Diederik Aerts]], [[Leo Apostel]], Bart de Moor, Staf Hellemans, Edel Maex, Hubert van Belle & Jan van der Veken (1994). [https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/659775 "World views. From Fragmentation to Integration"]. VUB Press. Translation of Apostel and Van der Veken 1991 with some additions. – The basic book of World Views, from the Center Leo Apostel.{{page needed|date=May 2020}}</ref> a worldview is an [[ontology]], or a descriptive [[Mental model|model]] of the world. It should comprise these six elements:

# An [[explanation]] of the world
# A [[futurology]], answering the question "Where are we heading?"
# Values, answers to [[ethical]] questions: "What should we do?"
# A [[praxeology]], or [[methodology]], or theory of [[Action (philosophy)|action]]: "How should we attain our goals?"
# An [[epistemology]], or theory of [[knowledge]]: "What is [[truth|true]] and false?"
# An [[etiology]]. A constructed world-view should contain an account of its own "building blocks", its origins and construction.