Brian Schroeder

Efforts to be worldview-neutral with Johnny’s education has proven fatal, not only for Johnny but for society at large. Though it is a dance many still attempt, feigned neutrality is not only impossible, it is self-defeating and self-deceiving for three reasons: (1) Ideas have consequences — we always reap what we sow.  Good ideas reap good consequences and bad ideas reap bad consequences; (2) Truth is absolute, meaning there are some things in life that are absolutely and always true for all people, in all places, at all times; (3) Individuals who embrace conflicting worldviews will eventually self-destruct and institutions that do so will eventually implode, because “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”

Mixed signals produce confusion, which is why Johnnie can’t think.  He’s been given no base.

A worldview is the lens through which we understand and interpret all of life.  It is the rudder on one’s ship of life and the “true north” of one’s soul compass that gives guidance and direction. It’s the anchor that keeps an individual or institution grounded and rational if it is consistent with truth and reality. Conversely, it is the fog that clouds the vision of both if it is not.

When all the layers are peeled back, there are essentially only two worldviews, and they are inherently, philosophically and permanently antithetical. Not only is there a great gulf fixed between them but never shall the twain meet. Moreover, pluralism notwithstanding, they utterly conflict and diametrically contradict in the following core areas:

​•​Their view of God (theism vs. atheism)

​•​Their view of human nature (inherently flawed vs. basically good)

​•​Their view of truth (absolute vs. relative)

​•​Their view of morality (objective vs. subjective)

​•​Their view of human sexuality (historic vs. postmodern)

​•​Their view of religion (freedom of vs. freedom from)

​•​Their view of government (limited vs. expansive)

​•​Their view of the family and marriage (traditional vs. alternative)

​•​Their view of education (classical vs. progressive)

For any institution or individual to try to accommodate both worldviews at the same time will be an exercise in both futility and cognitive dissonance. It produces muddy waters, confused thinkers and a veritable identity crisis. Riding the fence and keeping the peace seems easier, but in the long run it only drags out the inevitable. 

To move forward with a secure identity which provides both stability and continuity, Johnny needs a true north. So the first step is to establish clarity. The second is to draw your “line in the sand.” Both steps require courage, which has not proven to be the strongest quality of the human condition. Nonetheless, if Johnny is to think effectively, he must be equipped with a coherent worldview and value system that is rooted in truth and consistent with objective reality.

(Brian Schroeder is the former Wyoming Superintendent of Public Instruction, an ordained minister and founder/president of The ChrisCorps Commission (bschroeder081858@gmail.com))