More than 7 worldviews
Clarification to Geisler's Imprecise Claim in his Systematic Theology
There is no question more important than how man should think of the question of God’s existence. “The whole tenor of human life is certainly affected by whether men regard themselves as the supreme beings in the universe or acknowledge a superior — a superhuman being whom they conceive as an object of fear or love, a force to be defied or a Lord to be obeyed.”1 The way in which a person answers this question drastically changes their view of the world, otherwise known as a worldview.
Norman Geisler, in volume 1 of his Systematic Theology, claims there are seven major worldviews. “There are seven major worldviews, and each one is incompatible with the others. With one exception (pantheism/polytheism), no one can consistently believe in more than one worldview because the central premises of each are opposed by those of the others. Logically, only one worldview can be true; the others must be false. The seven major worldviews are as follows: atheism, pantheism, panentheism, deism, finite godism, and polytheism.”2
This claim, made under the chapter titled God: The Metaphysical Precondition, is not descriptive enough and can be misleading. While I am aware the chapter outlines only metaphysically derived worldviews (which is the intent of the chapter), I think it is an oversight that he makes no mention of agnosticism, which (I will argue) is a legitimate worldview. As I will describe below (and which Geisler was more than aware), there are different starting points to how we develop worldviews, and, though Geisler was aware of this and, for the sake of space, didn’t mention it, I think it would have been better if he had.
Within the complex history of philosophical thought there are 3 major schools: metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. All philosophical thought falls either within these three schools or between them. Metaphysics is concerned with ultimate reality; epistemology is concerned with how we know things; and axiology is concerned with value judgments. In regard to the question of God, the atheist makes the metaphysical claim that “God is not real,” which is a definition of ultimate reality. This claim places metaphysics at the top of the atheist’s hierarchy of thought, and from it the atheist’s epistemology and axiology are derived.
The history of philosophy can be split into three periods: Pre-modern, Modern, and Post-modern. The Pre-modern period was concerned, primarily, with metaphysical claims, and all epistemological and axiological theories were derived from these metaphysical claims. Descartes changed this when, instead of saying “I am, therefore I think” he said “I think, therefore I am.” This transition from philosophical systems being derived from their metaphysical assumptions to philosophical systems being derived from their epistemological systems is called the Epistemic Shift and from this shift the Modernist period of philosophy began.
In regard to the question of God, the agnostic begins with questions of how we know, which are epistemological. This is a different starting point than the atheist, who begins with questions of ultimate reality, which are metaphysical in nature. Thus, though Geisler is correct in stating that there are seven major metaphysical worldviews, I think that bringing the idea of agnosticism into view and juxtaposing it would have been helpful in this discussion. Someone who was not aware of the loose history I outlined may have been convinced there are only seven worldviews, which is only correct in regard to worldviews which begin with questions of ultimate reality.
Mortimer J. Adler, “Chapter 29: God,” in Great Books of the Western World, Volume 2: The Great Ideas I, ed. Robert Maynard Hutchins and Mortimer J. Adler, vol. 2 (Chicago, Ill.: Encyclopædea Britannica, Inc., 1989), 543.
Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1: Introduction/Bible (Minneapolis, Minn: Bethany House Publishers, 2002), 19.