Now SW says that there is a "natural" worldview and some "other" worldview, based on who knows what, which is the worldview that he holds.
Well, I would argue that every worldview is natural. Every worldview comes from the workings of someone's brain, and brains are natural. Brains are made up of biological and chemical reactions, as far as anyone can tell. So, until someone can demonstrate a non-biological, non-chemical brain process or function, we have to continue to assume that there are only natural worldviews. The difference is that some natural worldviews are based on concrete evidence, ie reality, and some are not.
And atheism is not by itself a worldview at all, only an observation about the world. Just look at the discussions we have about guns, education, health care, free will and so on to see that atheists don't all have the same worldview--we just don't think there are any gods.
If you were to read some background on the topic you are discussing,
then you'd have more information.
How was my statement inaccurate? The brain is an organ of the body made of cells, molecules and atoms, the same as the heart and the spleen. Like every other part of the body, the brain functions by biology and chemistry. And, like all the other parts of the body the brain's functions can be explained quite well by scientific investigation. Your brain does not have any more supernatural connections to the universe than your kneecap.
Would you allow someone who had no medical knowledge or training, but who believed strongly in god and used bible verses as references, to operate on your kneecap? heart? brain? Or would you prefer to have someone who did not believe in any gods, and had never read the bible in their life, but was an expert in the medical science of how the human body functions?
I don't think the bible, written thousands of years ago by people ignorant of neuroscience, gives accurate information on how people's brains work. And when it comes right down to it, even you agree with that.