Lesson video

<v Instructor>Hello there.

My name is Mr. Robertson.

I'm delighted that you've chosen a lesson with us today.

Today's lesson comes from our unit question in RE, worldviews, how do I see the world?

And does everyone see it the same way?

And in this lesson, our final lesson, we're going to be thinking about living harmoniously with people of different worldviews.

Look forward to starting this lesson with you.

By the end of this lesson, you will be able to evaluate scenarios to consider how to disagree well with people who have different worldviews to your own.

In this lesson, there are three keywords.

The first word is debate.

And by debate, we mean a respectful discussion where people share different reasons for their views, listen carefully to others.

And use those ideas to consider a question more deeply.

We also have the word disagreement.

And by disagreement, we mean differences in opinion between people.

And, finally, we have the word think in a worldviews context.

And in the context of this lesson, we mean how your worldview shapes the way you judge actions, make decisions, and understand other people's choices.

So in this lesson, we have two things we're going to look at.

We're gonna start by thinking about worldviews and decision making.

Now, as we often say in RE, everyone has a worldview, a way in which we see, understand, interpret, and live in the world around us.

But not everyone has the same worldview, and not everyone thinks about a worldview in the same way.

So it's very different how much people notice what their worldview is, question their worldview, or reflect on it.

Some people may say things like, "I have ideas about what matters in life, but I've never really thought about where those ideas come from.

" Others might say, "I spend time reflecting on why I see the world the way I do, and how my experiences shape my beliefs.

" I wonder which of those you feel you belong to more.

And I also wonder what you think someone might gain by reflecting on their worldview, and what they might find challenging about doing this.

If you want to please, pause the video and spend a little time in reflection, or have a conversation with someone around you.

I wonder what you came up with.

What is it about reflecting on your worldview that might help you develop yourselves?

Did you think of circumstances or conditions where it might be difficult or challenging to reflect on your worldview?

I hope you had a good discussion.

Now, our worldview influences the way we think.

And you can see we're representing that using a lens, because we see the world in a lens.

It reflects how we speak, what we say, and what we do, because worldview is about all those things.

It's not just about our internal thoughts, it's about how we interact with other people.

And how we practice, how we act out in the world.

Now we're going to meet two different people with different worldviews.

And we're going to meet Rebecca and Nell.

They're going to explain how their worldview affects their thinking.

Rebecca is a progressive Jew.

She says, "I try to follow the teachings of Judaism, like being honest and helping others, even when the choice isn't easy.

" Nell has a humanist worldview, and she says, "I usually think about the consequences of my actions.

I try to be fair and consider what will cause the most harm or good.

" I wonder if we can see how their worldviews connect, and how they differ.

Rebecca follows a religion, she has a religious worldview.

Nell as a humanist has a non-religious worldview.

But they both follow ways of trying to guide their lives, wanting to help each other.

But the way in which they start off is from their humanist or their Jewish backgrounds.

Let's look at a scenario, and we can tease out how people's worldviews affect them.

It's break time, Rebecca and Nell have just finished a lesson.

Some students have left books and equipment lying around.

They're explaining how they came to the decision that they should stay behind and help the teacher to tidy up.

Well, the first thing I'd say is, brilliant.

Thank you for doing that.

As teachers, we really appreciate when students make that extra sacrifice for us.

Rebecca says, "I'll help tidy up because I believe contributing to the community is the right thing to do.

" As a Jewish person, for Rebecca, community is really important.

Nell says, "I'll help tidy up because if I do, the classroom will be a better place for everyone to work.

" Nell there is thinking about the consequences of not tidying it up, meaning that other people will arrive in a mess and that will be hard for them.

Rebecca and Nell think differently as a result of their worldview, but they've come to the same conclusion.

Rebecca says, "I'll help tidy up because I believe contributing to the community is the right thing to do.

" Her Jewish worldview gives her clear principles about helping others and taking responsibility.

So she sees tidying the classroom as the right thing to do, regardless of the outcome.

Nell says, "I'll help tidy up because if I do, the classroom will be a better place for everyone to work.

" Nell's humanist worldview makes her consider the consequences of her actions.

So she helps tidy the classroom to reduce harm, and contribute to the greater good.

Let's check our understanding from what we've seen so far.

Thinking about that scenario, what does the fact that Rebecca and Nell agree on tidying the classroom tell us about worldviews?

A, people often think the same way.

B, people can act the same way, but think differently.

C, everyone has identical worldviews.

D, actions never link to worldview.

Pause the video and have a think here.

Excellent.

It's B, isn't it?

People can act the same way.

Both Rebecca and Nell both thought that they needed to stay and tidy the classroom.

But their thinking processes, their motivations were different.

Well done if you got that right.

Let's look at another scenario involving Rebecca and Nell.

They both have an opportunity to volunteer at a charity bake sale, and they're explaining what they decided to do.

Rebecca says, "I'll sell cakes because Judaism teaches that personally giving your time and effort to help others is important.

" Nell says, "I'd buy cakes for my friends and family rather than sell them because this will raise more money.

" So here we have slightly different things.

Pause the video a moment and think about this.

What is Rebecca going to do around the charity bake sale?

And what is Nell going to do?

What's similar?

And what's different about them?

So in this situation, there are differences in the way Rebecca and Nell think, and that's led them to disagree about what they should do.

Rebecca says, "I'd sell cakes because Judaism teaches that personally giving your time and effort to help others is important.

" So her Jewish worldview gives her principles about helping others and taking responsibility.

And because of that, she's choosing to sell cakes, personally giving her time and effort, because she believes it's the right thing to do.

What about Nell?

Well, Nell says, "I'd buy cakes for my friends and family rather than sell them because this will raise more money.

" So Nell's humanist worldview makes her consider the consequences of her actions.

So she chooses to buy cakes for her friends and family because this will raise more money and have more impact.

Now, it's really important to say here that when we're looking at Rebecca and Nell, we're not saying that all Jews or all humanists would follow the same way and make the same decision.

We're using them as case studies to help us understand a worldview.

And from what they say, we'll be able to draw out some principles here.

Let's check about our understanding so far.

I've got a missing word for you here.

Rebecca and Nell disagreed about whether to volunteer at the cake sale because their, (pauses), are different.

What word do you think would belong there?

Pause the video, have a think.

Excellent.

It's worldviews, isn't it?

Their worldviews are different.

Rebecca has a Jewish worldview and Nell has a humanist worldview.

Okay, let's draw together our learning so far.

We've met Rebecca and Nell.

I'd like you to imagine you face the same situation as them.

They're explaining how they came to the decision that they should stay behind after class and help the teacher tidy up.

Would you make the same choice in that scenario?

And whose thinking is closest to your own?

To remind you, Rebecca says, "I'll help tidy up because I believe contributing to the community is the right thing to do.

" Whereas Nell said, "I'll help tidy up because if I do, the classroom will be a better place for everyone to work.

" Whose thinking is closest to yours?

And why?

It may be that neither are that close.

So in which case, what would you do in that scenario?

And what would be your motivation?

So I wonder what you put for that.

You might have said, "I'm closer to Rebecca in the way I think and respond in this situation.

I'd help tidy because it feels right in itself.

It matches the kind of person I want to be.

Nell is right that helping with tidying will result in a good outcome for everyone, but my decision would be based on the action being right in itself.

" Of course, you may have had a very different reason.

And I wonder what yours was, but I hope that you managed to explain it.

And that's the most important thing.

Secondly, I want you to look at the other scenario that we looked at.

Rebecca and Nell are making a decision about whether to sell cakes or buy them.

Let's remind ourselves, Rebecca said, "I'd sell cakes because Judaism teaches that personally giving your time and effort to help others is important.

" Whereas Nell said, I'd buy cakes for my friends and family rather than sell them because this will raise more money.

" Again, who's thinking is closest to yours?

What would you do in that situation?

And why?

Really look forward to hearing your thinking.

So I wonder what you said.

Here's an example for you.

So you may have said, "I'm closer to Nell in the way I'd think and respond in this situation.

" I care about helping people in need and buying something at the bake sale is a way of doing that.

The consequences are important.

I have given enough money to buy cakes, and this means my action will raise money.

It might be that some students can't afford to buy many cakes, so I should leave the volunteering spaces to them.

" I wonder what you put and why.

The next part of this lesson is called disagreeing well.

Here are Jacob and Jun.

And they're organizing a class debate about the statement, stealing is always wrong.

Jacob says, "It's hard to say stealing is always wrong because some people think the act itself is bad, while others consider whether this situational outcome makes it more understandable.

" Jun says, "Exactly.

For example, stealing to survive, like getting food when you're starving, is different from stealing just for fun to get something you want.

" I wonder what you think about this.

So to have a debate, we need to start with some shared definitions so that we all know what we're talking about, because we can't discuss something if we don't have a shared understanding of it.

So, first of all, they agree on a definition of stealing.

Jun says, "Stealing is the taking of someone else's property without their consent, with the intention of permanently depriving them of it.

" Next, they decide to explore the way different people think about stealing.

So we've got a shared definition, we understand what stealing is.

But now we need to think about how people might respond and think about this idea.

To do this, they want to talk to some people with different religions and worldviews.

They start by asking Danielle, who's a Roman Catholic Christian, about a situation when someone is stealing to survive.

Here's our scenario.

A single parent steals bread and milk from a supermarket 'cause they have no money to feed their children.

Danielle says, "I think it's wrong to steal as the 10 Commandments teach it goes against God's wishes.

We should try to help people in situations like this so they don't feel the need to steal.

" So Danielle is saying, while I think that the action of stealing is wrong, but in this situation, we need to try and help people to stop them feeling that stealing is the only option.

Next they talk to Warren.

Warren is an atheist, and they're going to ask him the same situation.

Warren says, "I think it's okay to steal in this case because feeding hungry children is more important than the harm it might cause to the supermarket.

" So what is Warren arguing about this situation?

What does he say?

He's arguing that it's okay because it's about the harm to the children.

And they will suffer more harm by being hungry than the supermarket would for the bread and milk that it lost.

Jacob and Jun now asked Mustafa, who is Muslim, about a situation where someone steals to get something they want.

So we've got a different scenario now.

This is the scenario.

Someone shoplifts a beauty product that has been promoted on social media because they don't have enough money to pay for it.

So in this scenario, is it okay that this person steals?

Mustafa says, "I think that stealing is morally wrong, even if someone feels pressured or tempted.

Islam emphasizes respect for others' property, and stealing is haram, or forbidden.

So how does Mustafa respond to this scenario?

We can see that he thinks stealing is morally wrong.

And the fact that someone felt pressured or tempted doesn't make it okay.

In fact, he says that stealing other people's property is haram, is forbidden in Islam.

Now they're going to ask Diane, Diane is a humanist, about this situation.

Diane says, "This sounds like the person concerned is acting under pressure.

It's important to understand their situation before judging their action.

So I can't say whether it's right or wrong.

" So how does Diane respond to this scenario?

Well, you may have noticed that Diane's quite concerned about the pressure and she wants to understand the situation in a bit more detail.

And her argument is, until I understand the situation, what pressure is this person feeling?

Then I can't really make a decision about whether it's right or wrong.

So it's quite a contrast to Mustafa's.

Where he's saying there stealing is wrong, that's a moral thing, she's saying, for me it's a bit more flexible.

I need to understand the situation first.

Whose worldview encouraged them to think about the consequences of an action before deciding if it's right or wrong?

Warren says, "I think it's okay to steal in this case because feeding hungry children is more important than the harm it might cause to the supermarket.

" Danielle says, "I think it's wrong to steal as the 10 Commandments teach it goes against God's wishes.

We should try to help people in situations like this so they don't feel the need to steal.

" Which world is thinking about the consequences there, Warren or Danielle's?

Pause the video and have a think.

Excellent.

It's Warren's, isn't it?

Because he wants to think about the consequences of the children going hungry, and measure that against the consequences of the supermarket losing money.

So having fought about this idea of debate, Jacob and Jun have concluded, the debate is likely to result in lots of disagreement.

If we have a situation like stealing is always wrong, some people are likely to argue for the statement because on principle it's a bad thing.

So they're going to agree that stealing is always wrong.

Others might consider the situation and consequences before deciding whether it's wrong.

So they may disagree that it's always wrong, and they might want some more information first.

So it's very likely, with a statement like that, that you're going to have people who agree with it and some people who disagree with it.

And probably lots of people in the middle who would like more information.

When they were thinking about debates and how they should work, Jacob and Jun wanted to create some rules because it's really important when we debate with each other that we think about each other's feelings.

That we make sure that we think about the impact of what we're saying.

Here are some rules that they came up with.

Listen first, make sure you understand what the other person is saying before you respond.

Don't just assume from the first thing they say that you know exactly what they're going to say.

Listen really carefully to them.

Secondly, use calm language.

Phrases like, "I see it differently," or "I understand your point, but.

" It's much better than, "No, you're wrong," or "Absolute rubbish.

" Calm, polite language keeps the debate flowing well and makes sure that everybody feels included and feels safe to say their opinion.

And, thirdly, find common ground.

Point out anything you agree on to keep the conversation balanced.

A debate isn't just about winning, it's about listening to other people and thinking and shaping your own opinions.

And often in debates, as you saw, listening to all of those people talking about stealing, there's a lot of common ground.

And it's often only the smaller things that we really disagree on.

Jacob and Jun are talking to their friend Laura about how their debate went.

Jacob says, "There was lots of disagreement in the debate, but people were listening to each other.

" Jun says, "Yeah, and they often replied to points they disagreed with by acknowledging the other person's view.

" Laura said, "The debate didn't change my mind, but I did reflect on my views as a result of listening to others.

" And that's really important.

When we engage in a debate, it's not about necessarily changing your mind, but it's about listening to the reasons that people argue.

And thinking, maybe I understand those people a little bit better now.

I don't necessarily agree with them, but I see where they're coming from, and maybe I understand their point of view a bit better.

And I can see that it's a valid point of view, even if it's not mine.

Let's just check what we've been thinking about here.

True or false, you cannot respect someone's worldview if you disagree with them?

Is that true or false?

Pause the video and have a think.

Excellent.

It's false, isn't it?

Because, of course, you can disagree with someone's worldview, but you can still respect them if you treat them like a person, you listen to them.

And you have answers that show that you've understood and seen their point of view, even if ultimately you disagree.

Okay, I would like you to have a go now at creating a debate on this statement, lying is always wrong.

I'd like you to think about the way we set up the debate thinking about how stealing is always wrong.

So you can either work by yourselves or with someone else.

I'd like you to write an opening speech thinking about this, and that should include your view with one main argument to support it developed by an example.

So you might say, "Lying is always wrong and I think it's wrong because," and give an example of where you think lying may be wrong.

I'd like you to think about a challenge that the other side might say to what you're saying.

And I'd like you to write a closing statement responding to that challenge.

And that should include what the challenge is, anything you can agree on, and why you ultimately disagree with their view.

You might foresee, for example, that the other side might say, "Ah, but what about a situation like this, when lying might need to be right?

" And I'd like you to think about, what would you say in response to that?

How would you meet that challenge?

Again, looking for common ground, using polite words like, "I see your point of view.

" Or, "With respect, I disagree.

" And, ultimately, put your closing thoughts.

Really looking forward to seeing how your debate runs, good luck.

So I wonder what you came up with.

You might have said, "Our view is that lying is not always wrong.

Sometimes telling the truth can cause unnecessary harm.

And in those situations, a lie can protect someone.

For example, if a friend has worked really hard on a piece of art and asks your opinion before it goes on display, telling them it's terrible might crush their confidence for no good reason.

The other side will probably argue that lying destroys trust.

Although we disagree that lying is always wrong, we agree that trust matters.

Whilst people shouldn't make a habit of lying, there are moments when the truth would cause unnecessary harm and a small lie can be the kinder choice.

Used carefully and for the right reasons, it strengthens rather than breaks trust.

" And in this example, you can see how we've set out a view, given an example.

And then we've thought of a counter example, but we've also agreed on something about trust.

But then we've come to a conclusion.

I wonder how your debate went.

And I wonder whether you agreed or disagreed with that statement.

I wonder if you felt that reflecting on the way we've thought about debating this lesson has made you think about how you respond to other people you disagree with.

Thank you for taking part in it.

Okay, to summarize then, we thought that different worldviews influence how people think and act.

We've learned that contrasting worldviews can lead to the same decision, even though the reasoning behind that decision is different.

We've learned that differences in worldviews can lead to different responses.

For example, when considering whether stealing is always wrong, some may focus on fixed principles and others might focus on the situation or consequences.

And finally, we've learned that respectful disagreement involves listening carefully, acknowledging other viewpoints, and responding with calm reasoned contributions.

I hope you've enjoyed thinking about these issues today.

And I hope, going forward, you think about how you respond when you meet people with different worldviews and people you disagree with.

Look forward to seeing you in another lesson soon.