The student can:

explain the concept of worldview (LOQ 1,2,4,6);

explain historical and contemporary interpretations of “the Reformed worldview” (LOQ 1,2,4,6);

critically reflect on appropriating the Reformed worldview for their cultural context (LOQ 1,5,6,7,8).

This course introduces students to the Reformed worldview developed in the Neo-Calvinist tradition. We use Naugle’s work to provide a historical, philosophical, and theological framework for Kuyper’s interpretation of the Reformed worldview. This framework will help students understand the strengths and weaknesses of Kuyper’s articulation of the Reformed worldview. This module also analyses contemporary expressions of the Reformed worldview. By discussing the work of Kuyper, Mouw, Griffioen, and Bavinck, students will understand the Reformed worldview’s public relevance.

Through dialogue with Wolterstorff’s and Smith’s critique of worldview thinking, students will be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the concept of worldview for Reformed theology, philosophy, and practice in our time. The goal of the module is for students to produce a final paper that reflects on the significance of the Reformed worldview in their cultural context.

• Lectures – 6 meetings of 3 hours each with Dr. Roel Kuiper
• Discussions
• Presentations
• Independent study

Contact hours: 18 hours

Lecture preparation: 56 hours

Independent study: 88 hours

Participation: 25% (i.e. making summaries and presenting them)

Paper: 75 %

Participation includes

submitting every week to Canvas a brief description of the main argument of the literature we discussed and note questions for discussion in class (max. 500 words);

presenting a paper proposal in lecture five.

At the beginning of class, students will receive a grading rubric that specifies the evaluation criteria, based on the module’s learning goals, for the paper.

In grading, special attention will be devoted to the following:

• The quality and depth with which the topic of worldview in its historical development and actual presence is discussed;
• The extent to which the content of lectures, reader, and additional literature has been used;
• Creativity, independence, level of difficulty of the theme that was dealt with;
• The relevance of the topic discussed for the local context / culture of the student;
• Methodological soundness.