Product Description

When The Universe Next Door was first introduced more than twenty years ago, it set the standard for a clear, readable introduction to worldviews. In concise, easily understood prose, James W. Sire explained the basics of theism, deism, naturalism, nihilism, existentialism, Eastern monism and the new consciousness. Later editions have updated and expanded to include important sections on Marxism, secular humanism, New Age philosophy, and postmodernism. The Universe Next Door has been translated into many languages and has been used as a text at over one hundred colleges and universities in courses ranging from apologetics and world religions to history and English literature. This latest edition will continue to aid students, teachers and anyone who wants to understand the variety of worldviews that compete with Christianity.

Customer Reviews:

• A Christian analysis of other presuppositions
  There are a number of reviewers who are under the impression that the only way to write a world-view catalog is from an objective position which has no bias at all.
  This is unfortunate, because the book tries to show us how everyone has a presuppositional bias: there is no objective middle ground from which to weigh up the others.
  
  This was required reading as a theology student, and I found it useful. His 7 questions are powerful and useful in deconstructing longer texts, but other sets of questions are more useful and easily deployed in analyzing world-views on a regular basis, such
  1) what is my relationship to creation in this view
  2) what is my relationship to other people in this view
  3) what is my relationship to God in this view.
  
  Another useful one is
  1) What is the problem
  2) What can save us/them from the problem
  3) What does the world look like once it is saved?
  
  
  Personally, I found it helpful to realize that not everyone thinks like me, and to use this book as a very useful quick guide to the way others may think. Of course he generalizes. Of course he is simplistic. But he is also helpful.
  
  I recommend.
  To those who criticize this book as validating Christians in their blinkered view, I suggest finding a different book to validate them in theirs. But isn't that rather Sire's point about us all having a world-view based on a series of assumptions which may or may not stack up? ...more info
• There is a Spanish version of this book
  Hay una edici¨®n en espa?ol de este libro publicada por Libros Desaf¨ªo y basada en la ¨²ltima edici¨®n en ingl¨¦s....more info
• Apologetic for Christian Theism
  This modest-sized book is presented as concise descriptions of several worldviews and related thinking, those being Christian Theism, Deism, Naturalism, Nihilism, Existentialism, Eastern Pantheistic Monism (Hinduism), New Ageism, and Postmodernism. The basics of worldviews are: "the nature and character of ultimate reality, the nature of the universe, the nature of humanity and what happens at death, the basis of human knowing and ethics, and the meaning of history." The book is not as impartial in its consideration of the worldviews as might be expected for a catalog; the book slants characterizations of the worldviews based on the standard of Christian Theism.
  
  The basic tenets of Christian Theism are well known in the US: "God is infinite and personal, transcendent and immanent, omniscient, sovereign and good." He is self-conscious, thinks, and acts, and therefore, since humans are created in the image of God, they possess personality, morality, and creativity, capable, according to the author, of transcending the cosmos. This set of beliefs is accepted unquestionably, despite the fact that there is no credible evidence that any of the suppositions are anything other than the product of enterprising minds. See postmodernism below.
  
  The principle challenge to theism since the Enlightenment has come from naturalism. The ultimate reality for naturalists is the physical universe - that is, matter with physical and chemical properties. There is no supernatural realm of a creator God - only matter exists. Humans have evolved to become the most complex living species in the universe, yet their actions, thoughts, and personalities are all ultimately based on highly complex chemical and physical processes. They do not transcend the universe, but are an integral part of it.
  
  Human beings, from the naturalist perspective, are not the robotic, mechanical creatures that theists contend. In their view, humans can hardly rely upon a hypothetical God to reveal moral values and ethical behavior. Such concepts have to be constructed with real-world considerations as the only guide; their decisions are ultimately judged by how well they sustain the survival and well-being of mankind. Though human actions most certainly have antecedent causes, it certainly seems that humans do exercise choice and responsibility within the naturalistic framework.
  
  There have been any number of reactions to the basic implication of naturalism: that God is dead. Nihilism is the reaction of despair to the absence of transcendent meaning in the world, which can take the form of a variety of psychotic behaviors. Existentialism seeks to transcend nihilism by positing a physical world of inexorability and a subjective, but free, world of the mind. But a burden is placed on humans to create themselves. The authentic person must revolt against the alien, absurd objective world and create value. Choice becomes an ethical good in and of itself. Fortunately, real-world naturalist systems of laws and social standards enforce ethical standards.
  
  The New Age reaction to naturalism places ultimate reality within each individual person - he or she becomes God. A consciousness is emphasized that transcends the limitations of time, space, and conventional morality. Somewhat like existentialism, two worlds are envisaged: the visible universe and the invisible accessible only through altered states of consciousness. Since the self is God, ethics is relative only to a person. New Age philosophy accepts each person's perceived world as equally valid - beyond criticism. Each person is the sole judge of whether his or her system works. As the author points out, this is a form of epistemological nihilism: there is no non-relative reality. Many view New Age philosophy as a form of megalomania.
  
  Eastern, pantheistic monism holds that one infinite, impersonal element constitutes reality - that is, God. God is the cosmos and each person is God - nothing exists that is not God. Contrary to theism, human beings in their essence - their truest, fullest being - are impersonal. To realize one's oneness with the cosmos is to pass beyond knowledge and beyond good and evil - the cosmos is perfect at every moment. The main road to oneness requires quiet and solitude, enhanced by chanting an intellectually contentless word such as "Om." The self-effacement of Eastern thought is barely comprehensible to Westerners who assume complex self-aware and self-determining personalities.
  
  Postmodernism is not so much a worldview as it is a critique of those who try to construct a worldview. Postmodernists contend that reality, truth, ethics, etc are basically unknowable; they are only constructs of language which is no more than the expression of the current regime of power. Human beings are in fact constructs of language, which is an existentialist view. The social good is whatever those who wield power in society choose to make it.
  
  The author takes postmodernism mainly to be a criticism of the modernist concept of naturalism which is primarily based on human reason and rationality. However, it is hardly conceivable that a worldview that is based on a transcendent God, where humans are made in the image of God and justice is divinely revealed would or should escape a postmodernist analysis. It's hard to imagine a philosophy that is more likely to invoke the postmodern contention that meta-narratives are at best an illusion.
  
  The author does not suggest that he fully captures all of the subtleties of the worldviews that he chooses to explicate. Instead of the agenda of discrediting the thinking of modernist naturalists, a more fruitful direction would have been to assess all worldviews in general including the theistic. One does not have to be a giant of perception to appreciate that it is science and reason that have revealed the modern world in all of its complexity. It is the world that all people actually live in, work in, communicate in, etc. Despite incomplete understanding, it is not an illusory world - a world of only bogus constructions. Human society would have collapsed long ago from the sheer weight of any such widespread fantasies. It is clearly ironic that theism, New Ageism, and postmodernism construct supernatural or subjective worldviews, knowing full well that there is a real world based on human reason and understanding to depend on.
  
  Postmodernism has legitimacy in its corrective to the notion that human thought and action is entirely straightforward. Power does dictate the shape of human societies and the language used to describe such societies. Yet that power can be analyzed by those willing to dig beyond the propaganda. The fact that such power is wielded does not translate into a contention that an unknowable, transcendent God somehow provides a frame of reference for understanding or even living in our world. Genuine knowledge may be hard to come by, but escaping into the supernatural or worlds of fantasy will hardly work. The author unwittingly makes the case for naturalism being the only worldview that has even the remotest chance of maintaining human society, though that is an unfinished task. Unfortunately, naturalists are placed in the position of having to provide the foundation to support those who engage in non-rational, even delusional, prescriptions.
  
  Contrary to some, it was not expected that a "catalog" of worldviews would be an apologetic for Christian theism. Nonetheless, the book is thought provoking.
  ...more info
• Great content... a little hard to read.
  James Sire's book "The Universe Next Door" is absolutely essential to understanding people's ways of looking at the world. Keep in mind that this book only deals with Western thought, so it's not completely exhaustive. Sire outlines the points of each chapter very well, but sometimes the thoughts themselves are hard to comprehend at first read. If you want to get everything out of this book, you're going to have to devote your complete attention to it. Highly recommeneded....more info
• An excellent introduction to worldviews.
  Mr.Sire's book is exactly what it claims to be; a basic worldview catalog. It is well written and covers its topic nicely. His points are not always fully fleshed out, but that is expected for a brief work on such a broad topic. If interested, one should take Mr. Sire's advice and dig deeper into the subject....more info
• Disappointing, overly biased read
  I had to read this book for a Worldview class at Dallas Baptist University. The goal of my class was supposedly for me to establish my worldview and develop an understanding around my reasons for believing as I do. I would have enjoyed the book much more if Sire had attempted to truly take an unbiased look at other worldviews. The tone is almost always preachy and arrogant against all views except Theism. It's no surprise to anyone with half a brain which worldview he subscribes to (hint...it's the one he doesn't make weak, circular arguments about and attempt to drag through the mud). I don't know if I'm more disappointed in the book or in my school for making me read this with the supposed intention of understanding my belief system. I found this book to be a waste of time and no help at all to anyone who really wants to examine their worldview. If you are a Christian looking for someone to validate you in a half-baked manner, this is the book for you. ...more info
• A great introduction to a foundational topic
  This is another excellent book by Sire. ("Scripture Twisting" was a classic!) It begins with the premise that all people have a worldview, whether they've articulated it or not. He then proceeds to examine the major worldviews, and the implications of each. Sire is not ashamed of his own Christian Monotheism, but gives an accurate picture of the other views. Especially helpful is his coverage of how various views have affected art, culture, politics, and society in general. This book is relatively easy to read, but covers some heavy stuff. Highly recommended....more info
• Not quite impartial
  Sire seems to be a pretty bright guy, but his review of the various "worldviews" is quite obviously an attempt to convince you that "theism" (his term for a traditional Christian philosophy) is the only reasonable philosophy to practice. While his critiques of other philosophies are reasonably well-done and truthful, rather than explaining the breadth of a particular philosophy, his goal appears to be only to show its shortcomings. Then he tells you why "theism" is best. Over and over again. And, while he can't wait to tell you the various shortcomings of various philosophies, he treats "theism" as if has no contradictions and is the only possible philosophy that could be accepted by a rational person.

  If you're looking to be convinced that the basic Christian view of the cosmos is superior to every other view, this is the book for you. If you're looking for an impartial summary of various world philosophies (which is how the book appeared to advertise itself), look elsewhere.

  Note that this book is published by a division of the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, something I didn't notice until after I had already bought it....more info

• way too vitriolic and lacking in fairness
  As much as I admire the task James Sire has undertaken in "The Universe Next Door," I cannot endorse his book. Having given my life to Christ as an adult, I have some perspective on some of the worldviews Sire discusses (having once subscribed to some of them).

  Sire does not approach any of these worldviews on their own terms. He is constantly sketching out incomplete pictures of what he discusses, sometimes reverting to straw men and logical fallacies to try and push his weakest points. Particularly grievous is his ad hoc dismissal of Eastern thought on the grounds that it does not fit into a rationalistic western paradigm.

  More disturbing still is the mocking, often superior tone he takes in his arguments. This is especially tragic because these forms of non-arguments are most often used to delegitimize Christians trying engage in an intellectual exchange.

  No subject is addressed in its entirety. The chapter on New Age thinking focuses so exclusively on a couple of personalities that it ignores whole systems of New Age thought. The consequences of modern Naturalism are not really addressed (Far too many apologists write against Darwin's thought rather than what is currently taught--Sire is a card-carrying member of this club.) Zen Buddhism is treated almost as an afterthought.

  A lot of these problems probably come from Sire's over-reliance on secondary source material. Though from time to time he throws in a quote from Hesse's Siddhartha (which is also secondary if you ask me), most of the time he is quoting from like-minded colleagues.

  While I share Sire's final estimation--that Jesus Christ is Lord and the rest of these things are just fantasy lands, I was severely disappointed with this book. It does not really engage any of the other systems in a fair debate. Sire is playing with a stacked deck.

  I do not recommend "The Universe Next Door" to any serious student of worldview thinking....more info

• Start here
  If your question is "which God?" this is a great place to begin. If it weren't for this amazing book, I might still be floundering around in search of the truth. ...more info
• Good Idea, Poor Execution
  The stated goal of this book is to survey the various ways that humans make meaning out of the universe. Its method is to screen different worldviews through some basic questions: how did the universe get here? How do we know what's real? What's true? What's moral? Given the contention among current worldviews, and the truculence of true believers, a dispassionate survey would be a real service, especially in a textbook read by young people trying to sort out what they believe.
  
  Unfortunately, that is not the book we get. The biggest problem is that Sires is both a Theist (someone who believes in a loving, benevolent, personal God who takes an active interest in what we do) and a biblical literalist (someone who believes that the Bible is the word of the Christian God and is literally true). He sabotages his credibility by pretending to be objective right up to the last few pages of the book, where he reveals his worldview preference, which will surprise no one. If he'd stated his biases up front, I may not have agreed with him, but I would have had more respect for his intellectual honesty.
  
  The second problem is that his notions about what constitute a worldview are erratic and confusing. Theism, Deism and Naturalism are worldviews. Hinduism and Buddhism are worldviews. Nihilism is a philosophical stance, not a worldview. Existentialism and Postmodernism lie somewhere between worldviews and philosophical stances. New Age beliefs tend to be outgrowths or syntheses of other worldviews. Sires lumps them all together in importance, which leads to some lumpy proportions in the book. By what possible logic does a book on what humans in the world believe devote four pages to Buddhism, and only Zen at that, while spending 21 on Nihilism and 30 on Postmodernism?
  
  The third problem is that he dismisses every other worldview besides Christian Theism by stating that it posits a "closed universe", which means one not charged with meaning from outside itself (for "meaning", read Sire's Christian God). This closed universe is an insurmountable contradiction to Sires because there is no external authority to arbitrate what's true and what's not. So why haven't all these non-Theists ignited into balls of blue flame from the friction of their internal contradictions? Perhaps because when you live in the real world as opposed to the world of philosophical constructs such as nihilism, there are several ways to arrive at definitions of what's just and what's true. Tradition for one, or the lessons of history that endure the test of time, or the collective wisdom of bottoms-up consensus, or human laws that honor the will of the majority while respecting the rights of the individual.
  
  None of these methods are perfect, but they are valid, at least as valid as Sire's Bible. And which truths are we supposed to take from the Bible? The one that says place your child on a pyre and ignite it? Lend your virgin daughters for the enjoyment of the townspeople banging at your door? Butcher anyone who doesn't roast animals to Yaweh or observe the Sabbath? If the whole thing isn't meant to be taken as literal truth, who decides what the true bits are? More often that not, it's some less than perfect human, such as the American Catholic bishops or Ted Haggard. In which case our Christian Theists are in the same epistemological boat as the non God-besotted: making arbitrary meaning in the here and now. If I'm a person trying to make meaning out of existence, given the choice between an anthology of almost hallucinatory violence pasted together over hundreds of years by thousands of anonymous scribes with bones to pick and axes to grind on the one hand, or the collective traditions of eastern spiritualism and western scientific rationalism on the other, I might make different choices than Sire does.
  
  To give the Theist his due, the explanation of Existentialism is good, with a useful distinction between theistic and atheistic existentialism and a very insightful dissection of Camus' The Plague. His description of Hinduism is cogent, if somewhat academic. And he presents the language games of postmodernism with some dispassion. On the negative side, he dismisses Deism as the outpost of a few scientists, conveniently overlooking its long and honorable history as a way to explain how Sire's loving, benevolent God could allow so much evil and suffering in the world. And he doesn't give the naturalist world view enough credit for pushing back religious superstition and ignorance and for advancing epistemological reasoning (just as he doesn't take them to task enough for allowing truth to get divorced from morality, leading to totalitarian horrors that rival the depredations of the monotheists). The New Age chapter was significantly updated for this edition, but so jammed with footnotes as to be almost unreadable. If there's another edition, this material should be worked into the main text.
  
  The idea of this book is a good one, and, judging from the fact that The Universe Next Door has gone into a fourth printing, there's a thirst for this kind of worldview comparison. I'd like to see this same book written by someone less biased....more info
• great book
  this was a great book. it was very insightful. the author did a great job of defining and describng the most prominent worldviews held in todays world....more info
• How can "a reader from Minnesota" be so simplistic?
  I read the book several months ago and was impressed by Sire's treatment of such complex issues. What bothers me very much is how self-styled "critics" can expect to be taken seriously when they make such 3rd grade comments as "There is no compelling argument coming from this book." The book is an introduction to worldviews; it shouldn't even be expected to have an "argument."...more info
• I wish more people would read this book !!!
  This is a great book.
  I've read the older edition in russian, and then I bought the new one (that includes Postmodernism), but didn't read it yet. However, this is a great book and James Sire is the good man (because he did good decent research). I wish more people would read it and see how inconsistent some worldviews are...
  If you liked this book read more from the same author AND try "Understanding the times" by David Noebel. They have new edition on their website (Amazon doesn't have it yet) - at Summit Ministries.
  
  ~thanks~...more info
• Excellent!
  We used this book in our class on Western Heritage. It is really useful in explaining the differences in current world views as well as the development and historical aspects of our own....more info
• Where is the option to award less than one star?
  This book is offered as a textbook to give college students the opportunity to explore various worldviews. Sire admits some bias toward his Christian Fundamentalist views, but claims he will attempt to repress them in the interest of fairness. Sire emphasizes that the book isn't meant as a decree of his personal worldview. Reading past the first chapter proves otherwise.
  Sire is the living, breathing antithesis of the term "impartial". The book's alleged premise is a smokescreen. Its true objective being to convert young readers to his warped, narrow version of Christianity. Though initially skeptical of the author's ability to be objective, in light of his religious convictions, I determined to keep an open mind and trust that Sire, as a professed Christian, possessed intellectual integrity. Honesty is one of the main tenets of the religion, after all. Reading beyond the introduction brought me back to reality. The first chapter,(Christian) Theism, is given preferential treatment, understandably. If I were writing a book on various belief systems, I wouldn't honestly be able to avoid presenting my own in a positive light. Sire stated in the introduction, however, each worldview would include a description of its strengths and weaknesses. Interestingly, no "weaknesses" in theism are mentioned. His bias gradually progresses from tepid criticism to total vilification of the "absurd" world views that conflict with his own. His arguments are not only invalid, but snide and arrogant, weakening his stance, word by patronizing word. He uses psychological manipulation to instill spiritual panic in the reader from the start. Sire writes "those who do not have faith in the...Lord...must feel - alienation, loneliness, even despair" and "...the loss of a center to life [God] is like the chasm in the heart of a child whose father has died." He clearly insinuates the tragic fate of the reader witless enough to reject Christian Theism. His words "...we live either the examined or the unexamined life...the examined life is better" epitomize his hypocrisy. It is soon apparent he hasn't researched the worldviews he presents. He doesn't want readers to thoughtfully examine issues of consciousness, rather follow his lead...to the letter. His certitude in the authenticity of his worldview falters as he denies its vulnerabilities, its contradictions. Sire refers to disagreements in the early Church as "family squabbles." Historians take a slightly stronger view. What Sire flippantly refers to as "family squabbles" were used to justify the torture and execution of countless people, Christian and otherwise. To list all examples of exaggeration, distortion, and haphazard research, would require a book in itself. Therefore follows a scattering of the book's myriad sins.
  Deism, given a generous evaluation compared to other views, writes Sire, is a "reduction" in theism, implying inferiority. "A deeper study of the deists would...lead to the conclusion that they were simply inconsistent and didn't realize it." Apparently men like Locke, Jefferson, Lincoln, Voltaire, and Tennyson did not have the mental capacity to realize the inconsistency of their worldview. Sire then attempts to explain naturalism, claiming it to be a step toward nihilism. Subsequent worldviews are declared progressive shifts away from God, toward nihilism. As Deism originated in Theism, then Theism itself, as a matter of course, must then be the origin of nihilism. Sire, however, fails to make this connection.
  Sire refers to Christian ethics as "traditional morality", the source of all modern values. In truth, most of the stories contained in the Bible are revisions of stories written thousands of years before. The Ten Commandments were taken from the Law Code of King Hammurabi. "Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself", was a teaching of Confucius - five hundred years before Jesus preached the Golden Rule. The chapter on nihilism contains the most laughable fallacy. Sire suggests parallels between Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and nihilism. Adams was an atheist, not a nihilist. Sire refers to the characters' search for the "Ultimate Question of Life", answered by a supercomputer as "42." A new quest to find the ultimate question answered by "42", results in "What is 6x9?" Thus, Sire goes on to declare that "the most rational discipline in the universe [mathematics] has been reduced to absurdity." With a modicum of research he would have discovered that 6 x 9 at base 13, rather than the conventional base 10, indeed equals 42. Sire states that "to read....Douglas Adams is to begin to feel....the pangs of human emptiness, of life that is without value...purpose ...meaning..." Quite the opposite, Adams' British satirical look at modernity has a large, diverse, and emotionally stable fan base.
  Particularly offensive is his suggestion that the supposed nihilistic worldviews of Nietzsche and Ernest Hemingway brought about their insanity and deaths. Modern scholars attribute Nietzsche's mental illness to syphilis, cancer or brain degeneration. Hemingway, a severe alcoholic suffering from bipolar disease, had a family history of suicide. It would have been surprising if he had not taken his life. Neither man was a nihilist, as a real research would have shown. The description of Eastern Pantheistic Monism is full of inconsistencies. He refers to Zen Buddhism as a monistic religion. It is non-theistic. Buddha taught that the path to enlightenment was found in the self, rather than external gods. The New Age movement is treated as though it is one collective acid trip. He presupposes that all students of New Ageism subscribe to uniform beliefs. An exploration of New Ageism cannot at once be so narrowly condensed and taken seriously. The connection he makes between the New Age movement and drug use is intentionally misleading, intended to prevent the reader from doing their own research. His treatment of Postmodernism is similar. A single chapter on Postmodern thought cannot scratch the surface of this enormously multifaceted philosophical body. Once again, Sire illustrates the pseudo research that formed the basis for this book.
  Sire's book is little more than the immature ranting of a small minded evangelist, so incapable of genuinely defending his beliefs, he resorts to trite, invalid arguments with irrational leaps from statement to conclusion. His position would have been credible and better reached its intended audience, had he portrayed the contrasting worldviews honestly and fairly. Presenting his subject objectively, without disguising it as a dispassionate survey would have merited a more positive review. I would have no grounds for this strong objection to this book and its author had it been upfront about its theme - a dissertation on Christian fundamentalism's superiority as a world view and its uncompromising truth. Sire has no less right than anyone to express his views freely, whatever they may be. It would be undefensable to state otherwise. However, Sire's work is no more than a deceitful sermon incognito admonishing and attempting to discredit any opposition, regardless of how remote, to Christian Fundamentalism. Ironically, I will close with Sire's own words. It is indeed "not what you say you believe, but how you act you believe" that is your true worldview.
  
  
  
  
  ...more info
• A Read-Worthy, Christian Leaning Overview With Some Annoying Faults
  The Universe Next Door
  James W. Sire
  This review is on the Second Edition of the book, copyright 1988. That being the case there may be major changes in the book that address some current trends in worldviews (I hope that's actually the case).
  
  What's the Point of The Book?
  To give us a basic overview and introduction to several worldviews beginning from the author's own worldview (Christian Theism) all the way through the New Age Movement. The author is not trying to indoctrinate us in every point found in the worldview or even the major divisions throughout but he wishes to underscore some major features and question some major problems.
  
  The Good
  This is tough because it could also be a "bad" and only that because of the date of the original publication (1976). The meat of the book comes in 219 pages with bibliographical notes that bring the count up to 241 (The remaining 5 pages are devoted to the index). Those biographical notes are a godsend for anyone wanting to dig further into the material and are stated as such by the author. This edition actually features a much appreciated rewrite of the New Age movement section in light of how much has happened from 76 to 88. The worldviews are given pretty fair treatment considering what the author is doing (overview and not in-depth apologetics). The language is fitting with the subject and as worldviews grow increasingly complex the author stands with that view and exposes us to the language being used.
  
  The Bad
  The theistic section should have covered different theistic worldviews. I know his purpose was to give an overview and finally summarize how each of these fall short but by ignoring alternate theisms he doesn't really underscore how Christian Theism stands out. In this book it seems that it's either Christian Theism or Naturalism and all that grows out of that. Failing to mention, say Islamic Theism, is a huge oversight and one that can leave the reader saying "fine, naturalism is wacky but why not believe in {X Creator God} instead of the Christian God?" I also think that the nihilism section may have consisted of some ungrounded generalizations for instance he opens that chapter with "Nihilism is more a feeling than a philosophy. Strictly speaking, nihilism is not a philosophy at all." After this he proceeds to show how nihilism leads to despair and despair is the teaching of nihilism that grows out of a naturalistic framework. If he established it up front I wouldn't be as critical.
  
  The Ugly
  The cover illustration is dated but that is to be expected with a 1988 title. The book could have been longer and still accomplished its overview goal while simultaneously shedding some light on alternate worldviews.
  
  
  Star Rating
  All my remarks aside, I still think this book is well worth reading as an introduction into worldviews and understanding that the author doesn't intend for the book to do any more. I would warn the reader that the section on Eastern Pantheistic Monism is utterly confusing and demands a second and third reading but that is no fault of the author. Some of the things being dealt with in that philosophy are so outside Westerners' thinking that he or she may have to saturate themselves with the words so as to understand what is wrong with them. ...more info
• I refer to it CONSTANTLY .
  Well, organized, brief, fairly well balanced, I've read this book twice cover to cover and referred to it a hundred times by page and a thousand times in conversation.
  
  It's one of the most referenced books in my library.
  
  Practical use: that's the best recommendation I can think of.
  
  Some say it's too Christian oriented; while, others say it's not enough. Every writer comes with bias, and the author clearly states his own, while making a conscious effort of avoiding inserting his own bias. What more could you ask?
  
  My only complaint is that it treats each world view too briefly, but again, to make each section longer would just make the BOOK longer, and therefore reduce readability.
  
  Everytime I think of a criticsm of this book, I can't think of any beter way to do it....more info
• Sire's High Horse
  Sire's latest edition of this book is still as lousy as the first. He sees reality in "Black and White" which is not in and of itself bad, but for some Christians he's got the two mixed up. He has done is readers a disservice by simplifying the issues to the point of satire in places. Many of his arguments are laughable at best. A well researched book from a Christian perspective about other worldviews is certainly needed and would fulfill a purpose but this is not that book!...more info
• Biased introduction to worldviews
  "When The universe Next Door was first introduced more than twenty years ago, it set the standard for a clear, readable introduction to worldviews. In concise, easily understood prose, James W. Sire explained the basics of theism, deism, naturalism, nihilism, existentialism, Eastern monism and the new consciousness." This is what said on the back cover of the book, from where I believed it to be a good and objective introduction.

  Disappointingly, the author has shown his biased opinions throughout the book. As soon as in the first chapter, he declared that he himself is a Christian, which I think is undoubtedly a foolish act when writing a book of this kind.

  The author claimed in the introduction that "I have tried rigorously to be brief - to get to the heart of each worldview, suggest its strengths and weaknesses, and move to the next." And then in the next chapter on Christian Theism, he wrote NOTHING on its weaknesses, and eventually declared "... theism is a complete worldview".

  So theism is complete, what about others? "Deism did not prove to be a stable worldview," it is "inconsistent", "impracticable". "A practicing nihilist is a parasite on meaning". Such kind of biased descriptions is not uncommon in the book.

  In addition, the author had misunderstandings on certain interpretations of non-theist worldviews, not to mention his many invalid arguments.

  But I have to say that this book is not totally worthless, it can give you some ideas of different worldviews. But you DON'T adopt its values as the truth nor the sole source of information on the topic. That's my suggestion....more info

• Entirely useless literature
  I had to buy this book for a philosophy class. I hate it. Trying to learn about a worldview through a third party (Sire) is, at best, fustrating. Sire often sermonizes and is incessently adding his own opinions about whatever. Its really aggravating that it is assumed that the reader can't come up with his/her own opinion on the subject matter. ...more info
• Great summary of several world views logically presented
  Great book. World views are presented by answering several common questions so the comparison is easy. Highly recommend. ...more info
• Great Book! Everyone should read!
  I have been a fan of this book for nearly 10 years now . . . it is one of the most OUTSTANDING books on various worldviews from a Christian perspective. Unlike some of the other reviewers, I found Sire's BIAS refreshing--not only because I agreed with it, but Sire CONFESSES his bias early in the introduction of the text. It is refreshing to see an author who is intellectually honest with his audience who can recognize and admit to his own bias--so few with dogmatic opinions recognize the source or nature of their own bias/prejudice. This is not intended as a book discussing major world religions or cults, but is a study of large universally encompassing world views as expressed in several categories that Sire expounds upon so that the reader can make informed, rational comparisons. Sire carefully deconstructs the ideology of each world view from a scriptural viewpoint that allows the readers to see the philosophical errors of false doctrine of the various world views in light of Christian theology. Anyone who appreciates intellectual honesty will find this book both informative and refreshing....more info
• A satisfying overview of our Worldviews.
  This is, and excellent treatment of Worldviews and, covers in enough detail all those general categories into which all people must fall.
  Though some dislike his "bias" or find this work unfair - this is only due to a clash of Worldviews (not issues of truth).
  
  This catalogue is well written, displays enough content and descriptions to be reliable and finally, points out the logical ends of our systems of thought. One can choose to disagree but must ultimately make peace with the logical and honest "ends" of each Worldview presented (we cannot all be right when presenting opposing truth claims).
  
  I recommend this book to anyone confused or questioning the plethora of religious, spiritual or naturalistic beliefs intended to govern life!
  
  ...more info
• Sire's best book...still unipressed
  I have read a few of Sire's books and skimmed most of them and I can say that this is the best one that I've seen. Unfourtunatly that's not saying much. The reader will get a taste of several world views in a "set 'em up, knock 'em down format." As a christian myself I am a little conserned that other Christians, after reading this book, will feel as if they more or less know what the other world views are 'all about'. This assumtion should not be made. Those who hold to the views which Sire deals with will undoubtably feel as if they were not represented very strongly. The main objection that I have to this book is that Sire contrasts the Christian theism that domanted the western world up to the 17th century with the world views that have arisen since then. This guy is stuck in the past. In order to follow Sire one must not conceed anything to the opposition (and the opposition is everyone since the 17th c.!) He gives lip service to the great christian thinkers who have found truth in existentialism or postmodernism but then glibly dispatches of them in two or three pages. This book serves a purpose but leaves much to be desired....more info
• Unfair at times
  To me, Sire spent too much time trying to interpret worldviews rather than letting them speak for themselves. He is an intellectual, which is nice, but his generalizations felt a bit too prevalent. I would recommend something by Ravi Zacharias if you're looking for a less in-your-face approach to worldviews presented by a Christian author. I hope he revises this book and tones down the rhetoric, as it does contain some redeeming material....more info
• I Expected Better
  As part of my Worldviews class at Regent University, I had to read this book. I had great expectations about this text, but found myself sorely disappointed. NotATameLion said it well. Sire's complete and obvious biased against all worldviews but the Christian results in him making multiple snide and arrogant comments about anyone who isn't Christian and non-Christian worldviews. It would be far better if he could have kept his biased to a minimum and examined all the other worldviews fairly and equally. His regular sniping at other worldviews weakens his position that Christianity is best and made me wonder why he had to resort to nasty remarks if his position was true. It also gives the text an immature feel that further weakens his conclusions.
  
  Reading beyond the author's bad attitudes and comments, the discussions on the different "worldviews" is often confusing and had to follow. Several worldviews are not really worldviews at all, but a combination of a ton of different worldviews lumped together. Sire's seeming lack of respect for other opinions probably accounts for his lumping various worldviews together so that none are accurately portrayed.
  
  I really can't recommend this text to anyone and in my evaluation for this course, I shared my disappointment with this text....more info
• Negative Reviews As An Ego Defense
  Sire's "The Universe Next Door" is a great overview of the major worldviews prevalent today. No, it's not an exhaustive treatise...note the word "basic" in the subtitle. Yes, it is an apologetic (defense) of Christian theism, but an honest and fair one. Those railing about how their particular flavor of postmodernism, existentialism, etc., is left out or truncated are probably most bothered by Sire's ability to point out the inadequacies of those world views. Orthodox Christianity is the only worldview with adequate answers to the basic questions of ontology, epistemology,and ethics. Anything else is just an Indiana Jones approach to life - "I don't know. I'm making this up as I go!"

  Kudo's to Sire for such a thoughtful catalog. I am using it as a textbook for my Senior High Sunday School Class. I'm having to pick and choose a little as I go, but this book will be a wonderful resource to college bound kids who need to have had the arguments of the intelligensia dissected before they get to the ivory tower....more info

• An excellent resource
  Very, very useful in understanding major worldviews--and, of course, what constitutes a worldview. Read it. It was one of my favorite college textbooks. ...more info
• Great Book! Everyone should read!
  I have been a fan of this book for nearly 10 years now . . . it is one of the most OUTSTANDING books on various worldviews from a Christian perspective. Unlike some of the other reviewers, I found Sire's BIAS refreshing--not only because I agreed with it, but Sire CONFESSES his bias early in the introduction of the text. It is refreshing to see an author who is intellectually honest with his audience who can recognize and admit to his own bias--so few with dogmatic opinions recognize the source or nature of their own bias/prejudice. This is not intended as a book discussing major world religions or cults, but is a study of large universally encompassing world views as expressed in several categories that Sire expounds upon so that the reader can make informed, rational comparisons. Sire carefully deconstructs the ideology of each world view from a scriptural viewpoint that allows the readers to see the philosophical errors of false doctrine of the various world views in light of Christian theology. Anyone who appreciates intellectual honesty will find this book both informative and refreshing....more info