World view

This article is about the concept. For the WorldViewsatellite class, see DigitalGlobe. For the WorldViewnear-space ight company, see Paragon Space Develop-ment Corporation.

A comprehensive world view (or worldview) is the fun-damental cognitive orientation of an individual or societyencompassing the entirety of the individual or societysknowledge and point of view. A world view can includenatural philosophy; fundamental, existential, and norma-tive postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and ethics.[1]The term is a calque of the German word Weltanschau-ung [vlt.ana.] ( ), composed of Welt ('world')and Anschauung ('view' or 'outlook').[2]

It is a concept fundamental to German philosophy andepistemology and refers to a wide world perception. Ad-ditionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefsforming a global description through which an individual,group or culture watches and interprets the world and in-teracts with it. The German word is also in use in English,as well as the translated formworld outlook orworld view.

1 Origins

1.1 Linguistics

The founder of the idea that language and worldvieware inextricable is the Prussian philologist, Wilhelm vonHumboldt (17671835). Humboldt argued that languagewas part of the creative adventure of mankind. Culture,language and linguistic communities developed simulta-neously, he argued, and could not do so without one an-other. In stark contrast to linguistic determinism, whichinvites us to consider language as a constraint, a frame-work or a prison house, Humboldt maintained that speechis inherently and implicitly creative. Human beings taketheir place in speech and continue to modify languageand thought by their creative exchanges. Worldview re-mains a confused and confusing concept in English, usedvery dierently by linguists and sociologists. It is for thisreason that Underhill suggests ve subcategories: world-perceiving, world-conceiving, cultural mindset, personalworld, and perspective (see Underhill 2009, 2011 &2012).Edward Sapir also gives an account of the relationshipbetween thinking and speaking in English.The linguistic relativity hypothesis of Benjamin Lee

Whorf describes how the syntactic-semantic structure ofa language becomes an underlying structure for the worldview or Weltanschauung of a people through the orga-nization of the causal perception of the world and thelinguistic categorization of entities. As linguistic cate-gorization emerges as a representation of worldview andcausality, it furthermodies social perception and therebyleads to a continual interaction between language andperception.[3]

The hypothesis was well received in the late 1940s, butdeclined in prominence after a decade. In the 1990s,new research gave further support for the linguistic rel-ativity theory, in the works of Stephen Levinson and histeam at the Max Planck institute for psycholinguistics atNijmegen, Netherlands.[4] The theory has also gained at-tention through the work of Lera Boroditsky at StanfordUniversity.

1.2 Weltanschauung and cognitive philos-ophy

One of the most important concepts in cognitivephilosophy and cognitive sciences is the German conceptofWeltanschauung. This expression has often been usedto refer to the wide worldview or wide world percep-tion of a people, family, or person. TheWeltanschauungof a people originates from the unique world experienceof a people, which they experience over several millennia.The language of a people reects theWeltanschauung ofthat people in the form of its syntactic structures and un-translatable connotations and its denotations.The term 'Weltanschauung' is often wrongly attributed toWilhelm von Humboldt the founder of German ethno-linguistics (see Trabant). As Jrgen Trabant points out,however, and as Underhll reminds us in his 'Humboldt,Worldview and Language' (2009), Humboldts key con-cept was 'Weltansicht'. 'Weltanschauung', used rst byKant and later popularized by Hegel, was always used inGerman and later used in English to refermore to philoso-phies, ideologies and cultural or religious perspectives,than to linguistic communities and their mode of appre-hending reality.'Weltansicht' was used by Humboldt to refer to the over-arching conceptual and sensorial apprehension of realityshared by a linguistic community (Nation). But Hum-boldt maintained that the speaking human being was thecore of language. Speech maintains worldviews. World-views are not prisons which contain and constrain us, they

1

2 1 ORIGINS

are the spaces we develop within, create and resist cre-atively in speaking together.Worldview can be expressed as the fundamental cogni-tive, aective, and evaluative presuppositions a group ofpeople make about the nature of things, and which theyuse to order their lives.[5]

If it were possible to draw a map of the world on thebasis of Weltanschauung, it would probably be seen tocross political borders Weltanschauung is the prod-uct of political borders and common experiences ofa people from a geographical region,[6] environmental-climatic conditions, the economic resources available,socio-cultural systems, and the language family.[6] (Thework of the population geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza aims to show the gene-linguistic co-evolution ofpeople).If the SapirWhorf hypothesis is correct, the worldviewmap of the world would be similar to the linguistic map ofthe world. However, it would also almost coincide witha map of the world drawn on the basis of music acrosspeople.[7]

1.3 Folk-epics

See also: List of world folk-epics

As natural language becomes manifestations of worldperception, the literature of a people with commonWeltanschauung emerges as holistic representations ofthe wide world perception of the people. Thus the ex-tent and commonality between world folk-epics becomesamanifestation of the commonality and extent of a world-view.Epic poems are shared often by people across politicalborders and across generations. Examples of such epicsinclude the Nibelungenlied of the Germanic people, theIliad for the Ancient Greeks and Hellenized societies,the Silappadhikaram of the Tamil people, the Ramayanaand Mahabharata of the Hindus, the Gilgamesh of theMesopotamian-Sumerian civilization and the people ofthe Fertile Crescent at large, The Book of One Thousandand One Nights (Arabian nights) of the Arab world andthe Sundiata epic of the Mand people.

1.4 Development

While Apostel and his followers clearly hold that indi-viduals can construct worldviews, other writers regardworldviews as operating at a community level, or in anunconscious way. For instance, if ones worldview is xedby ones language, as according to a strong version of theSapirWhorf hypothesis, one would have to learn or in-vent a new language in order to construct a new world-view.

According to Apostel, a worldview is an ontology, or adescriptive model of the world. It should comprise thesesix elements:

1. An explanation of the world2. A futurology, answering the question Where are we

heading?"3. Values, answers to ethical questions: What should

we do?"4. A praxeology, or methodology, or theory of action:

How should we attain our goals?"5. An epistemology, or theory of knowledge: What is

true and false?"6. An etiology. A constructed world-view should con-

tain an account of its own building blocks, its ori-gins and construction.

1.5 Terror management theoryMain article: Terror management theory

Worldview, according to terror management theory(TMT), serves as a buer against death anxiety.[8] It istheorised that living up to the ideals of ones worldviewprovides a sense of self-esteem which provides a senseof transcending the limits of human life (e.g. literally, asin religious belief in immortality, symbolically, as in artworks or children to live on after ones death, or in contri-butions to ones culture).[8] Evidence in support of terrormanagement theory includes a series of experiments byJe Schimel and colleagues in which a group of Canadi-ans found to score highly on a measure of patriotism wereasked to read an essay attacking the dominant Canadianworldview.[8]

Using a test of death-thought accessibility (DTA), involv-ing an ambiguous word completion test (e.g. COFF__could either be completed as either COFFEE or COF-FIN), participants who had read the essay attacking theirworldview were found to have a signicantly higher levelof DTA than the control group, who read a similar es-say attacking Australian cultural values. Mood was alsomeasured following the worldview threat, to test whetherthe increase in death thoughts following worldview threatwere due to other causes, for example, anger at the attackon ones cultural worldview.[8] No signicant changeson mood scales were found immediately following theworldview threat.[8]

To test the generalisability of these ndings to groups andworldviews other than those of nationalistic Canadians,Schimel et al conducted a similar experiment on a groupof religious individuals whose worldview included thatof creationism.[8] Participants were asked to read an es-say which argued in support of the theory of evolution,

2.2 Other aspects 3

following which the same measure of DTA was taken asfor the Canadian group.[8] Religious participants with acreationist worldview were found to have a signicantlyhigher level of death-thought accessibility than those ofthe control group.[8]

Goldenberg et al found that highlighting the similari-ties between humans and other animals increases death-thought accessibility, as does attention to the physicalrather than meaningful qualities of sex.[9]

2 Impact

The term denotes a comprehensive set of opinions, seenas an organic unity, about the world as the medium andexercise of human existence. Weltanschauung serves asa framework for generating various dimensions of hu-man perception and experience like knowledge, politics,economics, religion, culture, science and ethics. For ex-ample, worldview of causality as uni-directional, cyclic,or spiral generates a framework of the world that reectsthese systems of causality.

2.1 Causality

A uni-directional view of causality is present in somemonotheistic views of the world with a beginning andan end and a single great force with a single end (e.g.,Christianity and Islam), while a cyclic worldview ofcausality is present in religious traditions which are cyclicand seasonal and wherein events and experiences recur insystematic patterns (e.g., Zoroastrianism, Mithraism andHinduism). These worldviews of causality not only un-derlie religious traditions but also other aspects of thoughtlike the purpose of history, political and economic the-ories, and systems like democracy, authoritarianism,anarchism, capitalism, socialism and communism.The worldview of a linear and non-linear causalitygenerates various related/conicting disciplines and ap-proaches in scientic thinking. The Weltanschauung ofthe temporal contiguity of act and event leads to under-lying diversications like determinism vs. free will. Aworldview of free will leads to disciplines that are gov-erned by simple laws that remain constant and are staticand empirical in scientic method, while a worldview ofdeterminism generates disciplines that are governed withgenerative systems and rationalistic in scientic method.Some forms of philosophical naturalism and materialismreject the validity of entities inaccessible to natural sci-ence. They view the scientic method as the most reliablemodel for building an understanding of the world.

2.2 Other aspectsIn The Language of the Third Reich, Weltanschauungencame to designate the instinctive understanding of com-plex geo-political problems by the Nazis, which allowedthem to act in the name of a supposedly higher ideal[10]and in accordance to their theory of the world. Theseacts, perceived outside that unique Weltanschauung, arenow commonly perceived as acts of aggression, such asopenly beginning invasions, twisting facts, and violatinghuman rights.

3 ReligionNishida Kitaro wrote extensively on the ReligiousWorldview in exploring the philosophical signicanceof Eastern religions.[11]

According to Neo-Calvinist David Naugle's World view:The History of a Concept, Conceiving of Christianity asa worldview has been one of the most signicant devel-opments in the recent history of the church.[12]

The Christian thinker James W. Sire denes a worldviewas a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart,that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presup-positions (assumptions which may be true, partially true,or entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subcon-sciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basicconstruction of reality, and that provides the foundationon which we live and move and have our being. He sug-gests that we should all think in terms of worldviews,that is, with a consciousness not only of our own way ofthought but also that of other people, so that we can rstunderstand and then genuinely communicate with othersin our pluralistic society.[13]

The commitment mentioned by James W. Sire can beextended further. The worldview increases the commit-ment to serve the world. With the change of a personsview towards the world the can be motivated to the servethe world. This serving attitude has been illustrated byTareq M Zayed as the 'Emancipatory Worldview' in hiswriting History of emancipatory worldview of Muslimlearners.[14]

4 PhilosophyMain article: Belief system

The philosophical importance of worldviews became in-creasingly clear during the 20th Century for a numberof reasons, such as increasing contact between cultures,and the failure of some aspects of the Enlightenmentproject, such as the rationalist project of attaining all truthby reason alone. Mathematical logic showed that fun-damental choices of axioms were essential in deductive

4 5 STREAMS IN CONTEMPORARY WESTERN POLITICS

reasoning[15] and that, even having chosen axioms not ev-erything that was true in a given logical system could beproven.[16] Some philosophers believe the problems ex-tend to the inconsistencies and failures which plaguedthe Enlightenment attempt to identify universal moraland rational principles";[17] although Enlightenment prin-ciples such as universal surage and the universal dec-laration of human rights are accepted, if not taken forgranted, by many.[18]

Philosophers also distinguish themanifest image from thescientic image. These phrases are due to the American20th century philosopher Wilfrid Sellars. This is one an-gle on the ancient philosophical distinction between ap-pearance and reality which is particularly pertinent to ev-eryday contemporary living. Indeed, many believe thatthe scientic image, with its reductionist methodology,will undermine our sense of individual freedom and re-sponsibility. So, many worry that as science advances,particularly cognitive neuroscience, we will be dehuman-ized. This certainly has powerful Nietzschean under-tones. When our immediately given, manifest (aka ob-vious) self-conception is shaken, what is lost for the indi-vidual and society? And does it have to be that way?[19]Some questions well worth working on, then, are thoseconcerning the renement of the manifest view of suchcentrally important concepts such as free will,[20] theself and individuality, and the possibility of real or livedmeaning.

4.1 Assessment and comparison of dier-ent worldviews

One can think of a worldview as comprising a number ofbasic beliefs which are philosophically equivalent to theaxioms of the worldview considered as a logical theory.These basic beliefs cannot, by denition, be proven (inthe logical sense) within the worldview precisely becausethey are axioms, and are typically argued from rather thanargued for.[21] However their coherence can be exploredphilosophically and logically.If two dierent worldviews have sucient common be-liefs it may be possible to have a constructive dialoguebetween them.[22]

On the other hand, if dierent worldviews are held tobe basically incommensurate and irreconcilable, then thesituation is one of cultural relativism and would there-fore incur the standard criticisms from philosophical real-ists.[23][24][25] Additionally, religious believers might notwish to see their beliefs relativized into something that isonly true for them.[26][27] Subjective logic is a belief-reasoning formalism where beliefs explicitly are subjec-tively held by individuals but where a consensus betweendierent worldviews can be achieved.[28]

A third alternative sees the worldview approach as onlya methodological relativism, as a suspension judgmentabout the truth of various belief systems but not a dec-

laration that there is no global truth. For instance, thereligious philosopher Ninian Smart begins his World-views: Cross-cultural Explorations of Human Beliefs withExploring Religions and Analysing Worldviews and ar-gues for the neutral, dispassionate study of dierent re-ligious and secular systemsa process I call worldviewanalysis.[29]

The comparison of religious, philosophical or scienticworldviews is a delicate endeavor, because such world-views start from dierent presuppositions and cognitivevalues. Clment Vidal[30] has proposed metaphilosophi-cal criteria for the comparison of worldviews, classifyingthem in three broad categories:

1. objective: objective consistency, scienticity, scope2. subjective: subjective consistency, personal utility,

emotionality3. intersubjective: intersubjective consistency, collec-

tive utility, narrativity

5 Streams in contemporary West-ern politics

According toMichael Lind, a worldview is a more or lesscoherent understanding of the nature of reality, whichpermits its holders to interpret new information in light oftheir preconceptions. Clashes among worldviews cannotbe ended by a simple appeal to facts. Even if rival sidesagree on the facts, peoplemay disagree on conclusions be-cause of their dierent premises. This is why politiciansoften seem to talk past one another, or ascribe dierentmeanings to the same events. Tribal or national wars areoften the result of incompatible worldviews. Lind hasorganized American political worldviews into ve cate-gories:

Neoliberal Globalism believes that at home govern-ments should provide only basic public goods likeinfrastructure and security, and do so by market-friendly methods

Social Democratic Liberalism claims an economicsafety net, protecting citizens from unemployment,sickness, poverty in old age and other disasters, isnecessary if democratic government is to retain pop-ular support.

Populist Nationalism tends to favor restriction oflegal as well as illegal immigration to protect thecore stock of the tribe-state from dilution by dif-ferent races, ethnic groups or religions. Populistnationalism also tends to favor protectionist poli-cies that shield workers and businesses, particularlysmall businesses, from foreign competition.

5 Libertarian Isolationism would abandon foreign al-liances, dismantle most of its military, and return toa 19th-century pattern of decentralized governmentand an economy based on small businesses and smallfarms.

Green Malthusianism synthesizes mystical versionsof environmentalism with alarm about populationgrowth in the tradition of the Rev. Thomas Malthus

Not all people will t neatly into only one category or theother, but Lind argues that their core worldview shapeshow they frame their arguments.[31]

6 See also Attitude polarization Belief Belief networks Christian worldview Cognitive bias Contemplation Cultural identity Emancipatory Worldview Eschatology Extrospection Ideology Life stance Mental model Metaknowledge Metanarrative Metaphysics Mindset Ontology Organizing principle Paradigm Perspective Philosophy Psycholinguistics Reality Reality tunnel

Received view Religion Scientic modeling Scientism Social justice Social reality Socially constructed reality Subjective logic Truth Umwelt Value system

7 References[1] Palmer, Gary B. (1996). Toward A Theory of Cultural

Linguistics. University of Texas Press. p. 114. ISBN978-0-292-76569-6.

[2] Online Etymology Dictionary. Etymonline.com. Re-trieved 2012-08-13.

[3] Kay, P.; Kempton, W. (1984). What is the Sapir-WhorfHypothesis?". American Anthropologist 86 (1): 6579.doi:10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050. JSTOR 679389.

[4] http://www.mpi.nl/world/ Max Planck Institute for Psy-cholinguistics

[5] Hiebert, Paul G. Transforming Worldviews: an anthro-pological understanding of how people change. GrandRapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2008

[6] Carroll, John B. (ed.) [1956] (1997). Language, Thought,and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf.Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press of MassachusettsInstitute of Technology. ISBN 0-262-73006-5.

[7] Whorf, Benjamin (John Carroll, Editor) (1956). Lan-guage, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Ben-jamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press.

[8] Schimel, J., Hayes, J., Williams, T., & Jahrig, J. (2007). IsDeath Really the Worm at the Core? Converging Evidencethat Worldview Threat Increases Death-Thought Accessi-bility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.92, No. 5, pp. 789-803.

[9] Goldenberg, J. L., Cox, C. R., Pyszczynski, T., Green-berg, J., & Solomon, S. (2002). Understanding humanambivalence about sex: The eects of stripping sex ofmeaning. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 310320.

[10] Victor Klemperer, The Language of the Third Reich: APhilologists Notebook, trans. Martin Brady, London:Continuum, 2002

6 8 EXTERNAL LINKS

[11] Indeed Kitaros nal book is Last Writings: Nothingnessand the Religious Worldview

[12] David K. Naugle Worldview: The History of a ConceptISBN 0-8028-4761-7 page 4

[13] James W. Sire The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog p1516 (text readable at Amazon.com)

[14] https://www.academia.edu/9631989/History_of_emancipatory_worldview_of_Muslim_learners

[15] Not just in the obvious sense that you need axioms toprove anything, but the fact that for example the Axiomof choice and Axiom S5, although widely regarded as cor-rect, were in some sense optional.

[16] see Godels incompleteness theorem and discussion in egJohn Lucas's The Freedom of the Will

[17] Thus Alister McGrath in The Science of God p 109 citingin particular Alasdair MacIntyre's Whose Justice? WhichRationality? he also cites NicholasWolterstor and PaulFeyerabend

[18] Governments in a democracy do not grant the fundamen-tal freedoms enumerated by Jeerson; governments arecreated to protect those freedoms that every individualpossesses by virtue of his or her existence. In their for-mulation by the Enlightenment philosophers of the 17thand 18th centuries, inalienable rights are God-given nat-ural rights. These rights are not destroyed when civil so-ciety is created, and neither society nor government canremove or alienate them.US Gov website on democ-racy

[19] see Owen Flanagans 'The Problem of the Soul', 2002

[20] see especially Daniel Dennetts 'Freedom Evolves, 2003

[21] see eg Daniel Hill and Randal Rauser Christian Philoso-phy AZ Edinburgh University Press (2006) ISBN 978-0-7486-2152-1 p200

[22] In the Christian tradition this goes back at least to JustinMartyr's Dialogues with Trypho, A Jew, and has roots inthe debates recorded in the New Testament For a discus-sion of the long history of religious dialogue in India, seeAmartya Sen's The Argumentative Indian

[23] Cognitive Relativism, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

[24] The problem of self-refutation is quite general. It ariseswhether truth is relativized to a framework of concepts, ofbeliefs, of standards, of practices.Stanford Encyclopediaof Philosophy

[25] The Friesian School on Relativism

[26] Pope Benedict warns against relativism

[27] Ratzinger, J. Relativism, the Central Problem for Faith To-day

[28] Jsang, Audun (2001). International Journal of Un-certainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 9 (3):279311. doi:10.1142/S0218488501000831.

[29] Ninian Smart Worldviews: Crosscultural Explorations ofHuman Beliefs (3rd Edition) ISBN 0-13-020980-5 p14

[30] Vidal, Clment (2012). Metaphilosophical Criteria forWorldview Comparison. Metaphilosophy 43 (3): 306347. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01749.x.

[31] Lind, Michael. 'The ve worldviews that dene Americanpolitics Salon Magazine, 11 Jan 2011 . Michael Lind isPolicy Director of the Economic Growth Program at theNew America Foundation

8 External links GLOGO - Global Governance System for PlanetEarth at think tank Gold Mercury International

Diederik Aerts, Leo Apostel, Bart de Moor, StafHellemans, Edel Maex, Hubert van Belle & Jan vander Veken (1994) "World views. From Fragmen-tation to Integration" VUB Press. Translation of(Apostel and Van der Veken 1991) with some ad-ditions. The basic book of World Views, from theCenter Leo Apostel.

Apostel, Leo and Van der Veken, Jan. (1991)Wereldbeelden, DNB/Pelckmans.

Wikibook:The scientic world view Wiki Worldview Themes: A Structure for Charac-

terizing and Analyzing Worldviews includes links tonearly 400 Wikipedia articles

You are what you speak PDF (5.15 MB) an es-say on current research in linguistic relativity (LeraBoroditsky)

Cobern, W. World View, Metaphysics, and Episte-mology PDF (50.3 KB)

inTERRAgation.comA documentary project.Collecting and evaluating answers to the meaningof life from around the world.

The God ContentionComparing various world-views, faiths, and religions through the eyes of theiradvocates.

Cole, Graham A., Do Christians have a Worldview?A paper examining the concept of worldview as itrelates to and has been used by Christianity. Con-tains a helpful annotated bibliography.

World View article on the Principia CyberneticaProject

Worldviews An Introduction from Project World-view

Studies onWorld Views Related to Science (list ofsuggested books and resources) from the AmericanScientic Aliation (a Christian perspective)

7 Eugene Webb, Worldview and Mind: ReligiousThought and Psychological Development. Columbia,MO: University of Missouri Press, 2009.

Benjamin Gal-Or, Cosmology, Physics and Philos-ophy, Springer Verlag, 1981, 1983, 1987, ISBN 0-387-90581-2, ISBN 0-387-96526-2.

Eduard Pogorskiy World View // Knowledge. Un-derstanding. Skill. 2012. 4. P. 322323.

.. . 1. / .. // ( ) [ ]. :, 2011. 09(73). . 310 319. : http://ej.kubagro.ru/2011/09/pdf/29.pdf (http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17087744)

8 9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses9.1 Text

World view Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%20view?oldid=642672222 Contributors: Magnus Manske, SimonP, Infrogma-tion, Michael Hardy, BoNoMoJo (old), Andres, Conti, Fuzheado, Greenrd, VeryVerily, Shizhao, Robbot, ChrisG, Kizor, Altenmann,Sam Spade, Texture, Gidonb, Hadal, Tobias Bergemann, Alan Liefting, DocWatson42, Djinn112, Jjamison, Iota, Andycjp, Karol Langner,JimWae, Ukexpat, Robin klein, CALR, Discospinster, Rhobite, Leibniz, Frehorse, Rama, Florian Blaschke, Gronky, Danakil, Brian0918,CanisRufus, MBisanz, Walden, Kwamikagami, Mwanner, Bobo192, Nectarowed, Neg, Mdd, HasharBot, Kitoba, Espoo, Ronline, Har-burg, Wtmitchell, Ish ishwar, Cburnett, Maqs, Grenavitar, Bsadowski1, Throbblefoot, Stemonitis, Woohookitty, Wdyoung, WadeSim-Miser, MGTom, Gimboid13, Allen3, BD2412, Dpr, Rjwilmsi, Vagab, Quiddity, Hatch68, Commander Nemet, YurikBot, Wavelength,RussBot, Mark Malcampo, Hornplease, Pigman, Chris Capoccia, DanMS, Shell Kinney, Chaos, Gustavb, Denihilonihil, Amakuha, AaronSchulz, Tomisti, Square87, Brz7, Shawnc, Bernd in Japan, GrinBot, Nekura, Snalwibma, SmackBot, Jasy jatere, DarbyAsh, Big Adamsky,Canthusus, ElAmericano, Skizzik, ERcheck, Chris the speller, Kurykh, MalafayaBot, Gasala, Rick Smit, Nbarth, The Moose, MovGP0,Ft. Jack Hackett, Mladilozof, Scwlong, Martijn Hoekstra, Only, Metamagician3000, Vina-iwbot, Scientizzle, IronGargoyle, Waggers,CharlesMartel, Armon, JMK, Spark, Aeternus, Nerfer, Kurtan, CmdrObot, Tragen, Mak Thorpe, Gregbard, Cydebot, Reywas92, Peter-djones, SyntaxError55, PKT, Letranova, Thijs!bot, Barticus88, Marek69, West Brom 4ever, Nick Number, WinBot, Flibjib8, Scepia,Davidfmurphy, BenC7, JAnDbot, NBeale, Leolaursen, Mcerik, Clementvidal, VoABot II, Lyonscc, JaGa, Edward321, MatrixReality,Greenguy1090, Dontdoit, MartinBot, Cutter1400, R'n'B, KTo288, Earthdenizen, J.delanoy, AstroHurricane001, Rivereld, Uncle Dick,Maurice Carbonaro, Katalaveno, Mikael Hggstrm, Wikidogia, Smallxer, Twump, Neodymium-142, Lynxmb, Bellrichard25, Abdul-lais4u, PDFbot, Kenshin, UnitedStatesian, Sacredmint, Andrewaskew, Falcon8765, Cnilep, AlleborgoBot, Moonriddengirl, Ayudante,Globaleducator, Airhogs777, DeknMike, Reneeholle, Wrdh, Firey322, JL-Bot, Twinsday, Sfan00 IMG, ClueBot, Kai-Hendrik, Incredi-blehunk, The Thing That Should Not Be, EoGuy, Drmies, Silent Key, Karanime, Trivialist, Alexbot, PhiRho, Thingg, Versus22, Johnuniq,Editor2020, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Dthomsen8, NellieBly, Good Olfactory, Addbot, Aaronjhill, Fiskot, 84user, Vasi, Jarble, Hint-gergedani, Yobot, Denispir, AnomieBOT, Galoubet, Materialscientist, Citation bot, Obersachsebot, Omnipaedista, RibotBOT, Gnuish,SD5, Thehelpfulbot, FrescoBot, Sisyphustkd, Paine Ellsworth, JTeal NZ, Alxeedo, Machine Elf 1735, Winterst, I dream of horses, Red-Bot, Barras, Jauhienij, MackieWeb, A p3rson, Reach Out to the Truth, Ew312, EmausBot, 4tytwo, Finn Bjrklid, Yedogawa, Wayne Slam,Urbanco, AndyTheGrump, DASHBotAV, ClueBot NG, Dream of Nyx, Helpful Pixie Bot, Curb Chain, WNYY98, BG19bot, PhnomPen-cil, CCeducator, North911, TBrandley, Deluno, Minsbot, Scott Delaney, CourtChru., Khazar2, Chandadeyoung, Nathanielrst, Cwobeel,Frosty, Andymunoz83194, NonEuclideanMind, AmericanLemming, Taylor.Bubble, Thisissparrta, Tango303, LudwidNDes, Zahara33e,Adirlanz, Liz, Themanifest, Soa Koutsouveli, Biblioworm, Atelfa, Tmzayed159, PunSoc, Lightshrine18 and Anonymous: 225

9.2 Images File:Plutchik-wheel.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Plutchik-wheel.svg License: Public domain Con-

tributors: Own work Original artist: Machine Elf 1735 File:Speaker_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Speaker_Icon.svg License: Public domain Con-

tributors: ? Original artist: ? File:Wikiquote-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg License: Public domain

Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

9.3 Content license Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

OriginsLinguisticsWeltanschauung and cognitive philosophyFolk-epicsDevelopmentTerror management theory

ImpactCausalityOther aspects

ReligionPhilosophyAssessment and comparison of different worldviews

Streams in contemporary Western politicsSee alsoReferencesExternal linksText and image sources, contributors, and licensesTextImagesContent license