Smart explains his structural understanding of worldview as being a triangle. At the top corner is the cosmos (meaning the physical universe) and the two bottom corners are self and society. One's worldview determines how the three corners are related. It also determines how self experiences the other two corners.
Smart believes that there are six dimensions that help define a worldview. While all worldviews have these six dimensions, the value a worldview may place on any one dimension will differ. The first of these dimensions is the Experiential Dimension. This aspect looks at how the self experiences the cosmos. Smart defines the experience as emotional with a range from terrifying to loving. He also says that an experience may be the same in two different religions, but the interpretation is not. The next dimension that he discusses is the Mythic. This refers to the stories on which a religion is founded and gets its meanings. The Doctrinal Dimension is the aspect of worldview that seeks to make sense of traditions, safeguard the myths, and make religious claims relevant to the current knowledge of the times. Smart's fourth dimension is Ethical. He differentiates between major and minor ethics. Smart says that the major ethics are common to many worldviews because a society could not survive without them. Without these, there would be no societies following any worldview. The Ritual Dimension includes areas such as worship, sacrifice, and rights of passage. The Social Dimension is the final aspect of worldview that Smart discusses. This dimension deals with the relationship between the two bottom angles of Smart's triangle.
The author provides a very broad overview of worldview both geographically and religiously.
The primary problem that I propose for Smart's theory is that he is trying to dispassionately understand the passionately held beliefs of others. The "traditional believer", according to Smart, is incapable of neutral and nonjudgmental analysis of the beliefs of others (or even their own). He appears to fault "traditional believers" for actually believing their beliefs. Smart's "structured empathy" makes it impossible for him to understand the beliefs of traditional believers. Smart wants them to abandon their certainty in the truthfulness and rightness of their beliefs. His preference would be that they would adopt his more rational and correct view of structured empathy and neutrality. In other words, he wants them to become true believers in his system.