I would say that the question is not the "reality" of worldviews but the usefulness of the concept to this discussion. Under your definition your statements are trivially true - and trivial.
Even when you distinguish between solid science and "everything else" in a worldview you still conflate everything that is not science. To look at extreme cases, a strong philosophical argument would be placed on the same level as blind adherence to dogma. This talk of worldview seems to be just a lumping together of things that should be considered on their own merits if they are to be usefully discussed.
™ Version 4.2
