Having a Worldview
Most people form their worldview of life at an early age. This used to be at around 18 years old, but nowadays it is getting younger and younger. Once a worldview has been formed it is very rarely changed. What happens is that when people read literature or see a TV program they filter the contents through their ‘worldview filter’. This filter prevents other views coming into consciousness that could contaminate the existing view. We see this for example in politics. If you have a left-wing view of the world, you will read a speech by a right-wing politician with some skepticism. Conversely, a speech by a politician with whom you are sympathetic will be taken at face value.
Many people have an aversion to hard physical work. In fact this aversion is so common that it feeds a plethora of labour-saving devices: TV remote controls mean we don’t have to get up from the couch to change channels; escalators mean we don’t have to traipse up and down stairs; cars mean we don’t have to walk and so on. In the same way as people have an aversion to physical exercise, they have an aversion to mental exercise. We use calculators rather than do the sums in our head. We will look up an answer on the Internet rather than work it out for ourselves. The problem here is that we have delegated our thinking to others. If you don’t work things out for yourself you lose this ability and nowadays children don’t even develop it. The part of the brain that does this work is never developed and so people become dependant on others who can supply answers. Unfortunately, these people usually have their own worldview and have a vested interested in spreading it.
I have developed a method of suspending my own beliefs, and this is a good exercise to follow. For example, when you read an article, read it as if you will accept everything that is written. When you have finished assimilating the contents, form it into a consistent view. Then examine this view as a complete thought system. It is possible that you may find yourself accepting the opinion. More likely you will see that there are fundamental differences between this view and your own. Here’s an example. Suppose you had the view that illegal immigrants ought to be given citizenship, as these people are basically hard working human beings who deserve a fair go in life. You read an article against this view which gives the following arguments:
- Allowing full scale immigration means that English becomes a second-tier language
- Immigrants will work for low wages and will undercut the wage levels for natives
- Allowing unlimited immigration will cause overcrowding
Now, if you read this with a skeptical filter you will probably drop out after the first point: You may argue that having more languages and an influx of different cultures, makes the community richer. You may argue that immigrants do not give rise to lower wages and you may argue that overcrowding is not an issue in most countries which suffer from low birth rates. All this may be true (and I’m not arguing this particular issue one way or another). What I am suggesting is that instead of picking up on each point and dismissing it, you read the argument in its entirety and ask yourself ‘What is this person’s world view’? What is the thinking behind this? In this instance, you may say that this is fuelled by racism or xenophobia, but that doesn’t explain the viewpoint. You have to put yourself in the other person’s shoes. The danger is that you may find yourself agreeing with them. More likely, you will develop sympathy for their view but will still disagree. The reason is that you are probably starting from a different belief system. You make different assumptions. If someone thinks that that important thing is to have a good economy and a rich country and you think the important thing is human rights then you are unlikely to come round to their way of thinking. However, you can still appreciate their view.
In the example I gave, if you give priority to human rights and you read the views stated above you may go in with the your skeptical glasses on and dismiss the argument about lower wages. However, this is not really the issue. The issue may really be that you are prepared to accept lower wages in order to have a fairer country. In which case, why waste your time arguing about lower wages? Because people do not have a clear worldview and see arguments that differ from their worldview as enemies that have to be shot down, they do themselves a great disservice.
I see this all the time when people read my articles. They are not in the least interested in understanding the views I make. They want to fight them off with any weapons they have even if this includes ridicule and sometimes lying.
