Why do people behave the way they do? Could it be that their Weltanschauung needs restyling?
Weltanschauung, minimally speaking,is one’s interpretation of life based on their own personal experiences and the perception of these experiences. I only know about this term because I live with a philosopher. He’s always talking about Weltanschauung, his favorite leitmotif. And, in an attempt to transform his monologues into diaglogues, I did some research of my own.
Wikipedia tells me that it was German historian and hermeneutic professor Wilhelm Dilthey who, around 1911, came up with the term Weltanschauung that became popular with so many psychologists such as Freud and William James. But not everyone speaks German so “Weltanschauung“ had to be translated. The Anglo-Saxons translate it as “worldview” whereas Italians as “immagine del mondo” (image of the world). And here we find a big difference…is your Weltanschauung a view or an image?
A view means you are looking at something outside of yourself from a specific view point. But an image is a representation of something that’s not there. One Weltanschauung comes from looking out wherea the other comes from looking in.
So, in my mind’s eye, am I on the inside or outside of myself?
References: World view by Michael Kearney on archive.org HERE + Dilthey, philosopher of the human studies by Rudolf Makkreel on archive.org HERE
I think I am inside myself, but have to ponder this a bit more. And you?
Yes, I, too feel more inside than out. But it would be extradinary to be able to see oneself from the outside as others do, no?
Hi, Cynthia. 1. I love your mum’s portrait, 2. I think an image is certanly something you have in your mind but I’m not sure that we can say the thing is not there. I know this is a philosophical approach, which says that anything exists. But if anything exists why is that I can recognize or touch or eat the same things as you do? It doesn’t matter to me the fact that you can see them in a different way I see them. I know that you can make in your mind a representation of a thing which will be completely different or odd for me. But the thing exists. I mean, the image can be more or less faithful to the object, more or less fanciful or groundbreaking, but it doesn’t mean the object is not there somehow. (It’s my opinion only.) Somebody says that we “create with the given” (D. Winnicott.) Your question which is a beautiful question, is if in your mind’s eye you are inside or outside yourself. For me it has to be both. 🙂
Liliana, thank you for such a well thought out reply! Reflecting on “create with the given” (D. Winnicott.) will keep me busy today! Besitos!