Generally speaking, we could propose some guidelines for assessing rival views. These criteria don’t necessarily receive equal weight; some will be clearer and more fundamental than others. For example, a worldview’s match-up with reality (#1) should be weighted more strongly than practical livability (#5). After all, if Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, then the claim that “Jesus makes me happy and gives me purpose” is sorely misguided and out of touch with reality.
- A worldview is more likely to be true if it’s factually supportable and matches up with what we know to be real.
- A worldview is more likely to be true if it is coherent or internally consistent rather than self-contradictory.
- A worldview that’s likely to be true must not only be internally coherent, but must also have greater explanatory power than others.
- If a worldview neglects or denies good and evil or morality and virtue, it is fundamentally flawed.
- A worldview is more likely true if it is livable. If it is impossible to carry out in everyday life, it is likely false.
— Paul Copan, from Loving Wisdom, kindle location 966