Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Jester
Prodigy
Posts: 4214
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #1

Post by Jester »

Each of us has a worldview.
That is, each of us have a list of beliefs that get us through our day, on which we base our practical and ethical decisions and by which we find some sense of purpose in life.

I have noticed that many claim to have rejected all forms of theism on the grounds that they feel there is little or no evidence supporting it.
Assuming this is the case, which worldview (or weltanschauung) is supported by evidence?
And, of course, what is that evidence?
Last edited by Jester on Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We must continually ask ourselves whether victory has become more central to our goals than truth.

User avatar
Jester
Prodigy
Posts: 4214
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Post #2

Post by Jester »

Spilling over from another topic:
I AM ALL I AM wrote:I believe that Life surrounds my physicality and that the Sum Totality of Life is ALL THAT IS.

The evidence of this is my experience of Life. Now you can "attempt" to CONvince me of a religious 'reality', yet my experience shows it to be 'fake' from simple observation / experiential knowledge of Life.
I actually don't see any evidence here.
Counter-intuitive as it may be, there is actually no evidence for the existence of the physical universe. Likewise, there is no evidence that the physical universe comprises the whole of reality.

In addition, I would also be interested in other parts of your worldview, which would be analogous to parts of a religious belief - such as your ethical stances and sense of meaning in life - and to discuss whether or not they are more evidenced than theism.
We must continually ask ourselves whether victory has become more central to our goals than truth.

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #3

Post by bernee51 »

Jester wrote:Each of us have a worldview.
That is, each of us have a list of beliefs that get us through our day, on which we base our practical and ethical decisions and by which we find some sense of meaning and satisfaction in life.

I have noticed that many claim to have rejected all forms of theism on the grounds that they feel there is little or no evidence supporting it.
Assuming this is the case, which worldview (or weltanschauung) is supported by evidence? 
And, of course, what is that evidence?
I guess it is first appropriate to determine what is understood by the term worldview. I like this from Wiki...

... Christian thinker James W. Sire defines a worldview as "a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true, or entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic construction of reality, and that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being." He suggests that "we should all think in terms of worldviews, that is, with a consciousness not only of our own way of thought but also that of other people, so that we can first understand and then genuinely communicate with others in our pluralistic society."

Now it could be argued that all (or at least most) world views are supported by evidence. The Christian one by the literature and dogma which established it, the Islamic by it's literature...and so on.  this does not speak to the veracity or otherwise of that supporting literature.

I have consistently held that the only available evidence supports that we (humankind) are biological creatures who have evolved a level of consciousness that allows self reflectivity.  If this is the case then all our ideas, thoughts, beliefs, indeed our very sense of individual selfhood and all that support it are, and can only be, mental constructs.

From the ground up the available evidence is that we, like the rest of the universe, of which we are a part, are atoms and molecules, we are of the physiosphere. On this level,  only the adjustment of types of atoms/molecules and their arrangement we are no different to a rock, a single cell organism or a star. In this we go back in an unbroken chain for the entire existence of the universe as we know it.

However, our particular arrangement of atoms/molecules also supports our participation in the biosphere. We are biological creatures whose existence in this sphere is dependent on the integrity of this sphere. The development of neural systems within the biological has facilitated the ability to consciously interact with the biosphere to the point where we have become evolution aware of itself. 

The emergence of self reflective consciousness has facilitated and accelerated the emergence of the noosphere...the sphere of collective knowledge and concepts. It is here that the ideas we cognize, the beliefs we hold, the ideas we germinate, reside. Like the other spheres, the noosphere is evolving and the material which carries this evolution are memes...i.e. the ideas or beliefs that are transmitted from one person or group of people to another. 

An honest analysis of the beliefs held by disparate groups of humanity show that these beliefs, these concepts, including the god concept and related religions have evolved and are continuing to do so. The very evolution of society is mirrored by the evolution of consciousness in how it manifests in the individual. This is very well described in the theory known as spiral dynamics.

Where does this evidence lead in terms of 'worldview'? 

We are all in this together, we are 'one with' the universe at all levels of existence. Our differences are an illusion, albeit (as Einstein noted) a persistent one.
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
Jester
Prodigy
Posts: 4214
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #4

Post by Jester »

I did read your entire post, but am going to cut for the sake of berevity.
bernee51 wrote:I have consistently held that the only available evidence supports that we (humankind) are biological creatures who have evolved a level of consciousness that allows self reflectivity.  If this is the case then all our ideas, thoughts, beliefs, indeed our very sense of individual selfhood and all that support it are, and can only be, mental constructs.
This pre-assumes the existence of the physical universe. Yes, given it, we are biological creatures. Presuming the existence of the supernatural universe posed by the religions you mention leads us to believe that we are more in addition to that.
Neither universe, however, is evidenced.
bernee51 wrote:Where does this evidence lead in terms of 'worldview'? 

We are all in this together, we are 'one with' the universe at all levels of existence. Our differences are an illusion, albeit (as Einstein noted) a persistent one.
Even assuming the physical universe, I see nothing which evidences the idea that the differences between us are illusory. I clearly occupy different physical space, and am composed of a different physical form, than other people.
As something of a tangent, the quotation attributed to Einstein is actually "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a persistent one." [1] This would be more in line with the idea that there is no evidence for the existence of a physical universe than that there are no differences between us.
In fact, the idea that we are synonymous with one another is derived from philosophies such as Buddhism, which reject the physical universe as strictly real.
We must continually ask ourselves whether victory has become more central to our goals than truth.

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #5

Post by Goat »

Jester wrote:I did read your entire post, but am going to cut for the sake of berevity.
bernee51 wrote:I have consistently held that the only available evidence supports that we (humankind) are biological creatures who have evolved a level of consciousness that allows self reflectivity.  If this is the case then all our ideas, thoughts, beliefs, indeed our very sense of individual selfhood and all that support it are, and can only be, mental constructs.
This pre-assumes the existence of the physical universe. Yes, given it, we are biological creatures. Presuming the existence of the supernatural universe posed by the religions you mention leads us to believe that we are more in addition to that.
Neither universe, however, is evidenced.
.
Except for extreme sophistry, that is not a pre-assumption, because we have the experiences of our senses. Those senses were giving you information to act upon long before you started having a philosophy. Although you deny that, it is evidence for the physical universe.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #6

Post by bernee51 »

Jester wrote:I did read your entire post, but am going to cut for the sake of berevity.
bernee51 wrote:I have consistently held that the only available evidence supports that we (humankind) are biological creatures who have evolved a level of consciousness that allows self reflectivity.  If this is the case then all our ideas, thoughts, beliefs, indeed our very sense of individual selfhood and all that support it are, and can only be, mental constructs.
This pre-assumes the existence of the physical universe. Yes, given it, we are biological creatures. Presuming the existence of the supernatural universe posed by the religions you mention leads us to believe that we are more in addition to that.
I'm a little confused...on what basis can the existence of the supernatural universe be presumed? Because we presume the existence of the physical - damn that rock I stunned my toe on (the physical), now it is bleeding (the biological), I stunned it because it is god punishing me for my impure thoughts (the noological), therefore god exists (the supernatural)?

Jester wrote: Neither universe, however, is evidenced.
This is true, in fact Advaita Vedic philosophy, as expressed by Shankarachaya, holds "Brahman is real. The universe is unreal. Atman and Brahman are one." 

With his masterful statement "Only that is real that does not change nor cease to exist" he points out the complete  unreality of the universe and all things in it.

Jester wrote:
bernee51 wrote:Where does this evidence lead in terms of 'worldview'? 

We are all in this together, we are 'one with' the universe at all levels of existence. Our differences are an illusion, albeit (as Einstein noted) a persistent one.
Even assuming the physical universe, I see nothing which evidences the idea that the differences between us are illusory. I clearly occupy different physical space, and am composed of a different physical form, than other people.
However you are made of the same atoms, you respond biologically, the only difference is in your concepts...i.e. In the noological.
Jester wrote: As something of a tangent, the quotation attributed to Einstein is actually "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a persistent one." [1] This would be more in line with the idea that there is no evidence for the existence of a physical universe than that there are no differences between us.
Correct...I should have noted that I was paraphrasing Einstein. And if there is no evidence of the physical universe to the point where it is illusory then there is no differences between us...we are all illusory.

Jester wrote: In fact, the idea that we are synonymous with one another is derived from philosophies such as Buddhism, which reject the physical universe as strictly real.
Or more accurately, as noted above, on Advaita from which Buddhism has drawn much of its philosophy.
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
100%atheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2601
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:27 pm

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #7

Post by 100%atheist »

Jester wrote:Each of us has a worldview.
That is, each of us have a list of beliefs that get us through our day, on which we base our practical and ethical decisions and by which we find some sense of purpose in life.

I have noticed that many claim to have rejected all forms of theism on the grounds that they feel there is little or no evidence supporting it.
Assuming this is the case, which worldview (or weltanschauung) is supported by evidence?
And, of course, what is that evidence?
I think that it would make sense to ask whether or not certain claims (such as biblical or some scientific claims) are supported by the evidence. Worldviews and beliefs of an atheist and a christain can be almost identical except for a few claims.

User avatar
EduChris
Prodigy
Posts: 4615
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #8

Post by EduChris »

100%atheist wrote:...I think that it would make sense to ask whether or not certain claims (such as biblical or some scientific claims) are supported by the evidence...
The questions we ask, the evidence we choose to pursue and examine, the methods we employ, and the plausibilities we grant to various possibilities which follow from these subjective choices all derive from our (logically prior) worldview.

100%atheist wrote:...Worldviews and beliefs of an atheist and a christain can be almost identical except for a few claims.
That is true, but there are implications that logically follow from our respective starting points. Since the assumptions of atheism inevitably lead to incoherence, and since the same is not true for theism, it follows that theism is the rationally preferable starting point.

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: Which Worldview is Supported by Evidence?

Post #9

Post by bernee51 »

EduChris wrote:
100%atheist wrote:...I think that it would make sense to ask whether or not certain claims (such as biblical or some scientific claims) are supported by the evidence...
The questions we ask, the evidence we choose to pursue and examine, the methods we employ, and the plausibilities we grant to various possibilities which follow from these subjective choices all derive from our (logically prior) worldview.
And along with this a worldview will evolve...or not...in order to inform subsequent worldviews. 
EduChris wrote:
100%atheist wrote:...Worldviews and beliefs of an atheist and a christain can be almost identical except for a few claims.
That is true, but there are implications that logically follow from our respective starting points. Since the assumptions of atheism inevitably lead to incoherence, and since the same is not true for theism, it follows that theism is the rationally preferable starting point.
I do not wish to derail this thread questioning your unevidenced expressions of your worldview but I fail to understand how "I do not believe in god" brings with it incoherent assumptions whereas  "I believe in god" does not. 

I think seen you make this claim before, but have yet been unable to support it - except in your own estimation of the superiority of your argument.
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
LiamOS
Site Supporter
Posts: 3645
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:52 pm
Location: Ireland

Post #10

Post by LiamOS »

I think that in a philosophical sense, a worldview based on evidence is impossible.

As such, I adopt as sceptical a worldview as possible. Most assumptions pertaining to even the simplest things such as existence and logic are unsubstantiable, and as such I try to adopt as few as possible.

Post Reply