On an academic legal blog I visit, from time to time I see people using the word Weltanschauung where I feel worldview would have sufficed. It all seems a bit ostentatious to me, as I'm pretty sure that Weltanschauung had a precise academic usage before it became (fairly) common lingo. If in fact there is a difference between the two words, can someone demonstrate that difference to me, and illustrate with a couple of sentences when one word would be a better choice than the other?
Answer
Weltanschauung is used as an English word, from the German because the English worldview is too vague and not comprehensive enough. (For anschauen = to look at, rather with the meaning "to take a good look at", for schau = to show, display, as opposed to blicken = to look, or aussehen from sehen = to see).
Primarily it means a way a person looks at the phenomenon of life as a whole. Some people (particularly those who have not lived very long) have not formed any broad (inclusive, even "sophisticated") view of life. Others consider a large number of factors before forming their overall view — maybe in their seventies — of the phenomenon of human existence. Typically a person's Weltanschauung (as an English word we drop the capital letter required of all German nouns) would include a person's philosophic, moral, and religious conclusions — including e.g. the duality of spirit and matter — and perhaps their conclusions about the origins of the universe and of the development of life. They would also have conclusions about the state, society, politics and economic activity. I suggest def. "A person's conclusions about existence (however tentative) at a particular time of life, after taking a good look at everything they have come across about". What do the German philologists say about my amateur offering?
No comments:
Post a Comment