Values, worldviews and faith-based values

We have thought about the nature of values and how they relate to principles, standards, morals and ethics; and recognised that values shape our being and our doing, although in complex and not necessarily conscious ways. This section considers the relationship between our values and our worldview: the overarching framework of beliefs from which we view reality and make sense of life and the world.

Worldviews are, by definition, comprehensive: they are ideologies, philosophies, theologies, movements or religions that offer a description of:

the universe and life within it, both in terms of what is and what ought to be […] what exists and what does not (either in actuality, or in principle), what objects or experiences are good or bad, and what objectives, behaviors [sic], and relationships are desirable or undesirable. A worldview defines what can be known or done in the world, and how it can be known or done. In addition to defining what goals can be sought in life, a worldview defines what goals should be pursued. Worldviews include assumptions that may be unproven, and even unprovable, but these assumptions are superordinate, in that they provide the epistemic and ontological foundations for other beliefs within a belief system. (Koltko-Rivera, 2004:4).

Religions are the most obvious examples of worldviews, providing a comprehensive belief- system about the world and our place in it, defining what goals should be pursued and the ultimate purpose and end destination of life. However, other ‘faith’ or non-faith-based belief-systems, such as humanism, atheism, and some political ideologies could also be considered as ‘worldviews’, providing, as they do, a comprehensive framework of beliefs and values akin to a religion.

Rockeach (1973:6-7) distinguishes between worldviews, beliefs and values, positing three kinds of beliefs of different orders and locating values within them:

1) descriptive or existential beliefs, those capable of being true or false;

2) evaluative beliefs, wherein the object of belief is judged to be good or bad; and 3) prescriptive or proscriptive beliefs, wherein some means or end of action is

judged to be desirable or undesirable.

A value is a belief of the third kind—a prescriptive or proscriptive belief.

The values deriving from our worldview, for example respect for life, lead to an understanding of right and wrong ways of living, for example, moral positions on particular significant issues, such as abortion and a woman’s right to choose, sexual relationships, gender roles, and particular views on alcohol and drugs. These moral positions can be challenging to examine when tied to faith-based values, particularly if ‘right or holy living’ is considered a pre-requisite for entry into a ‘life after death’. Debates around moral issues that to some operate on an entirely human and time-bound level, may take on a spiritual and eternal significance for people of faith. Beckett and Maynard (2005:49) note that it ‘is a

curious fact that two people can disagree profoundly on the fundamental nature of the universe, and yet work together quite satisfactorily on the problems thrown up by every day life’. If people hold similar value-positions around abortion, for example, they may well be

able to overlook their very different worldviews, such as a Christian and a Muslim who both believe it is wrong to ‘kill an unborn child’. The difficulty comes when people’s worldviews cause them to hold radically opposing value-positions that are intrinsically woven into their worldviews; for example a radical Christian feminist and a conservative Christian.

Griffiths’ (2001:xiv) definition of a religion as ‘a form of life that seems to those who belong to

is to be comprehensive, incapable of abandonment, and of central importance’ is a reminder of

the all-encompassing nature of developed and considered worldviews. Values that derive from worldviews both support worldviews and are integral to those worldviews. Consequently, it can be extremely difficult to re-assess one value in isolation, as that one value is intimately entwined within the whole belief system, and the fear is that the whole worldview unravels (Escobar, 2014:64-81), somewhat akin to pulling a loose thread from a knitted jumper – initially it is only one isolated thread being pulled, but without realising, the whole jumper can become an unravelled heap of wool on the floor. This is why it can be extremely challenging and painful for adherents of developed worldviews to engage in a real dialogue with those from a differing worldview, and even harder for them to critically

examine, evaluate and change some of their value positions derived from their worldviews, such as faith-based values. This was a real concern for students in this study, as they sought to engage in a dialogue between their faith-based values and the professional values of youth work; and to examine some of their fundamental beliefs, values and associated moral positions. They did this with great respect for the young people they sought to engage, striving to ensure their faith-based values did not operate as a barrier to the young people they worked with; hoping, yet struggling, to initiate and engage in constructive and productive value and faith-based worldview discussions. Frequently, they talked of wrestling with themselves, as they sought to meet the presenting needs of young people, whilst trying to reconcile these actions-as-professionals with personal moral positions that contradicted their actions.

Another point to note specifically in relation to faith-based values is the move, in liberal pluralistic societies, to relegate religion from public discourse into the private realm (Rorty, 1994), on the basis that it acts as a ‘conversation stopper’, threatening communication between citizens. This has resulted in religion and faith-based values rarely being discussed in a constructive way in the public realm, despite religious faith ‘undoubtedly [being] one of

the main sources from which people derive their systems of values’ (Beckett & Maynard,

2005:48). For many welfare workers and those they work with, a belief in a religious faith and membership of a faith community provides a deep sense of security, meaning, purpose, personal validation, belonging and well-being. Holding a particular faith and its attendant practices can be a crucial part of people’s identity (Maynard, Beckett & Jordan 2017:38); and yet there are few current public examples of how to engage in constructive conversation and dialogue with each other, our faith positions and contemporary issues, in a spirit of respect, listening and genuine enquiry. Instead, we have models that prize shaming, belittling and winning an argument at all costs, without any consideration for how we might live together beyond this episode. Consequently, it has become increasingly difficult to constructively explore, and where necessary challenge, the validity of value positions that we believe do not make for human well-being. This is a particular concern for qualifying professionals in welfare occupations, such as social and youth work. Often our socialised default position is to keep our personal values firmly confined to the ‘private’ realm of our ‘personal life’, as if there are clear boundaries between the two. This makes the process of examining our personal values in the on-going task of professional values development extremely difficult, if not impossible, particularly if those values are derived from a faith position.