[Vision2020] Religion and Worldview are not the same

[Nick Gier]

Dear Eric,

I was initially relieved that you graciously allowed me the last word, but 
then you kept on "wording," so I feel inclined to reply.

First, if Jim Wilson is about to retire and you have settled in at the 
Nuart where Wilson's ministry is located, it is a safe assumption that you 
will be taking his place.  Second, if Wilson is your pastor and you grant 
him the unconditional authority that he has in that capacity, then I count 
you as one of his tribe. Third, with regard to disagreements that you might 
have with him, I would like to know more about these.  Do you, for 
example,  agree with the following: (1) that Southern slavery was greatest 
multiracial society in human history; (2) that gays and lesbians should be 
executed or exiled; (3) that most conservative evangelical Christian 
colleges are not truly Christian?  A Yes or No answer would be preferred.

I don't know where you got the idea that I believe (or that I teach) that 
all religions are equally true.  Most religions have beliefs that are 
clearly false in the strict sense of the laws of logic and the canons of 
evidence.  (The Incarnation, for example, is a logical contradiction.) Now, 
as I teacher at a public institution, I tried my best not to say that in 
class.  (If I had worked at a private institution, I would have maintained 
the same policy.)  When I taught world religions, I had my students read 
selections from the various scriptures and I let them make up their own 
minds about truth and falsity.  Or, more importantly, I asked them if that 
was right question to ask, suggesting that religious faith and practice do 
not have much to do with logic and evidence.  I made a point to warn them 
against conflating faith and reason and the dangers of evangelical 
rationalism and fundamentalism.

Finally, Eric, I don't agree with your equating religion and 
worldview.  For example, my worldview includes assumptions such as the 
following: (1) that there is a real world independent of my perception and 
knowledge of it; (2) that contemporary science (including neo-Darwinism) 
gives us the best understanding of how this world evolved and how it works; 
(3) that science cannot (and does not pretend to) answer ethical and 
spiritual questions.  Now I happen to fill out my own worldview with a 
theistic answer with a non-creator God, but people may choose other options 
or choose to be agnostic about ultimate questions.  (For example, virtue 
ethics works very well without God.) Therefore, I see religion as an 
optional aspect of any worldview.  By the way, I do not consider the basic 
assumptions 1-3 as matters of religious faith.

With regard to a definition of religion, philosophers of religion have 
argued for over a century and no real consensus has been achieved.  I've 
tried my own hand at this, so here is my rather technical definition from 
my Theology Bluebook chap. 1, sec. A.

Religion is a human phenomenon that involves a relationship (personal, 
cultic, institutional) of intense concern for a "hierophany" (from the 
Greek hieros = sacred). The literal meaning of hieros is "vigorous, mighty" 
and is directly related to the Sanskrit ishiras, which means "vigorous, 
fresh, blooming." Not all experiences of the sacred are of a distinct 
divine being(s) (Gk. theos, theoi). . . . The experience of the holy can be 
quite diffuse and indistinct, i.e., nontheological. Therefore, theology can 
derive its data only from those religious experiences in which the sacred 
is expressed as a distinct divine being. While religion involves a 
hierophany, theology therefore requires a "theophany," a revelation of God. 
Several religious traditions  Hebrew, Persian, Vedic, and Islamic  provide 
us with true theophanies. Etymologically, one can see that the meaning of 
theos developed from the same roots as hieros. The Hebrew word for God, 
'elohim, literally means "mighty ones" and compares favorably with the 
Vedic devas, the "shining ones" with all the power. . . .

To repeat my point, a worldview can certainly contain acknowledgement and 
worship of the sacred, but it does not have to.



"Modern physics has taught us that the nature of any system cannot be 
discovered by dividing it into its component parts and studying each part 
by itself. . . .We must keep our attention fixed on the whole and on the 
interconnection between the parts. The same is true of our intellectual 
life. It is impossible to make a clear cut between science, religion, and 
art. The whole is never equal simply to the sum of its various parts." 
--Max Planck

Nicholas F. Gier
Professor Emeritus, Department of Philosophy, University of Idaho
1037 Colt Rd., Moscow, ID 83843
http://users.moscow.com/ngier/home/index.htm
208-883-3360/882-9212/FAX 885-8950
President, Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO
www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/ift/index.htm