Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Framework For Worldviews

During dinner with LT and Mejlina last night, we came across the topic of 'conversations'. Mejlina was sharing her experience of handling questions while i listened with amazement of her consistent framework underneath her approach to questions and view of life. It dawn to me that i don have a fixed framework as her. Not sure which is better, as my approach to worldviews is evolutionary in nature, thus i can't cling on a 'fixed' frame to construct my view. But still, i need to have a consistent framework. And here is what i think i am:

1) All knowledge is fallible, thus all views, opinions, beliefs; including this belief itself

2) I see myself to respond to the world in two ways: (a) enjoy that which appeal to me (b) hate that which annoy me. (I enjoy justice when it serves me and other well, but at the same time, hate it when it find faults in me)

3) From these two responsive senses, together with my presumption of the causal chain-reaction, i believed every problem is this world has a primitive singular cause. From a reliable belief that the Bible is warranted historically, catholically, and theologically, this cause is sin. Thus all that annoy me are causes of sin. That includes my own laziness, unlovingness etc.

4) Again, from the warranted Bible, i came to see the works, message, and life of Jesus of Nazareth appeal to me. Though it causes annoyance, it is also the only warranted source of hope and joy which largely appealing and inviting.

Due to my first premise, i'm hanging on the edge between worldviews. Thus of my 'luke-warmness' in life, especially when everything seems to be uncertain in this time. The one only certainty is 'I exist'. This is a self-centred framework? Nope. It is the one and only frame that guarantees a rational living. There is a big difference between 'Man is the measure of all things' and 'Man thinks that Man is the measure of all things'. I'm the latter. The same with 'I think therefore i am' and 'I think that I think therefore I am'. Fallibility is a curse to me.

This is my framework. An ever evolving fallible rationality.

3 comments:

alwyn said...

heard of "iPod, therefore I am"? :)

sometimes i wonder if we NEED a worldview; must everyone have one? is a worldview one of those things which people 'logically cannot fail' to adopt?

i like the no.2 tenet of your framework.

Sze Zeng said...

hahaha... this is my time hearing it!

Well, i wonder too, Alwyn. Probably it is not that we 'logically' failed to adopt, but 'naturally' designed to adhere.

Dave Chang said...

"I exist"... :) That's enuff foundation for Descartes to build an entire philosophical system

In the end, the dictum should read "I think therefore God is". Check out Sproul's Consequences of Ideas!