7/25/2019 The Great Debate and End of Controversy http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-great-debate-and-end-of-controversy 1/27 African philosophy: the great debate and end of controversy in the light of Professor Maduabuchi Dukor’s Theistic HumanismAni Casimir K.C De!t of Philoso!hy"#nstitute of African $tudies %niversity of &igeria. ce!!erngo'yahoo.com Abstract The definition of (hat constitutes African !hiloso!hy has been !roblematic giving rise to debates concerning its constitutive ontology content authentic nature e)istence and methodology. The debate on African !hiloso!hy has raged on from the *+,-s till the close of the *++-s (ith illuminating e)!ose from the (orks of K(esi iredu as in !hiloso!hy and African cultures Pauline Hountondi/i in 0African !hiloso!hy1 Myth or 2eality3 Peter 4odunrin in his !a!er5 the 6uestion of African !hiloso!hy3 K(ame A!!iah in My 7ather’s House3 K.C Anyan(u in the !roblem of method in African !hiloso!hy3 K(ame 8yekye’s An 9ssay on African !hiloso!hical thought1 the Auan conce!tual scheme3 2obin Horton’s African thought and (estern science3 T.% &(ala’s 0#gbo !hiloso!hy’ and 0The :tonti Mandate’3 and in the t(enty first century the force de/ure !aradigmatic (orks of Professor Maduabuchi Dukor in his 0Theistic Humanism of African !hiloso!hy’ 0African 7reedom’ 0$cientific !aradigm in African !hiloso!hy’ and finally 0African !hiloso!hy in the global village’. &one of the other !hiloso!hical (orks not even !rofessor Makinde’s 0African !hiloso!hy1 the end of controversy’ ca!tures the logical consistency e!istemic logical coherence methodological !urity and scientific coherence of Professor Dukor’s theistic humanism (hich e)amines affirms and !roves finally the scientific nature method and e)istence of African !hiloso!hy a co5e6ual in the global village of !hiloso!hy. #t is the !osition of this article that Dukor’s theistic and humanistic scientificity incor!orates and demonstrates the inclusiveness of African !hiloso!hy as the basis and solution for the !resent socio5!olitical economic ethnical dilemmas faced by Africa in the ;*st century globali<ed (orld. The article (ill critically e)amine African !hiloso!hy in the conte)t of Professor Dukor’s theistic humanism and re5evaluate its contributions to the sustainable scholarshi! of African !hiloso!hy concerning its content methodology and e!istemic e)istence. Key words1 African !hiloso!hy the great debate theistic humanism traditionalism human values *
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
African philosophy: the great debate and end of controversy in the light of
Professor Maduabuchi Dukor’s Theistic Humanism
Ani Casimir K.C De!t of Philoso!hy"#nstitute of African $tudies %niversity of
&igeria. ce!!erngo'yahoo.com
Abstract
The definition of (hat constitutes African !hiloso!hy has been !roblematic giving rise
to debates concerning its constitutive ontology content authentic nature e)istence and
methodology. The debate on African !hiloso!hy has raged on from the *+,-s till the
close of the *++-s (ith illuminating e)!ose from the (orks of K(esi iredu as in
!hiloso!hy and African cultures Pauline Hountondi/i in 0African !hiloso!hy1 Myth or
2eality3 Peter 4odunrin in his !a!er5 the 6uestion of African !hiloso!hy3 K(ame
A!!iah in My 7ather’s House3 K.C Anyan(u in the !roblem of method in African
!hiloso!hy3 K(ame 8yekye’s An 9ssay on African !hiloso!hical thought1 the Auan
conce!tual scheme3 2obin Horton’s African thought and (estern science3 T.% &(ala’s
0#gbo !hiloso!hy’ and 0The :tonti Mandate’3 and in the t(enty first century the force
de/ure !aradigmatic (orks of Professor Maduabuchi Dukor in his 0Theistic Humanismof African !hiloso!hy’ 0African 7reedom’ 0$cientific !aradigm in African
!hiloso!hy’ and finally 0African !hiloso!hy in the global village’. &one of the other
!hiloso!hical (orks not even !rofessor Makinde’s 0African !hiloso!hy1 the end of
controversy’ ca!tures the logical consistency e!istemic logical coherence
methodological !urity and scientific coherence of Professor Dukor’s theistic humanism
(hich e)amines affirms and !roves finally the scientific nature method and e)istence
of African !hiloso!hy a co5e6ual in the global village of !hiloso!hy. #t is the !osition
of this article that Dukor’s theistic and humanistic scientificity incor!orates and
demonstrates the inclusiveness of African !hiloso!hy as the basis and solution for the
!resent socio5!olitical economic ethnical dilemmas faced by Africa in the ;*st century
globali<ed (orld. The article (ill critically e)amine African !hiloso!hy in the conte)t
of Professor Dukor’s theistic humanism and re5evaluate its contributions to the
sustainable scholarshi! of African !hiloso!hy concerning its content methodology and
e!istemic e)istence.
Key words1 African !hiloso!hy the great debate theistic humanism traditionalism
and its (orld5vie(. #t is to be noted that African scholars !articularly those (ith a
!hiloso!hical bent training and disci!line have engaged themselves (ith a !assion in
their massive contributions to this decades5old debate. The raging debate about the
e)istence or non5e)istence has s!a(ned a controversy that continues to define the
academic curricula of !hiloso!hy and !hiloso!hy5related disci!lines De!artments
#nstitutes"Centers of African studies in every other available intellectual fora both
online and offline as the debated issues have been documented globally. 7or some
scholars the debates and the controversies are necessary unnecessary relevant
irrelevant3 ve)atious !rovocative or out rightly mischievous as some of the claims in
the debates raise the 6uestionability of the humanity and rationality of the Africans5
sometimes falling short of denying the African !ersonality and being5hood the rational
ability and ca!acity to !hiloso!hi<e 7or us to understand these scholarly and
!hiloso!hical nuances of the logical im!utations of these arguments debates and enable
scholars to contribute to the gro(th e)!ansion and integration of African !hiloso!hy to
the global stream of different human !hiloso!hies (orldvie(s cosmology and
ontology it is im!ortant that (e set u! and establish certain milestones (ithin the
debate.These !hiloso!hical benchmarks (ill serve as logical canons that (ill assist the
scholars of ! African !hiloso!hy to generate rational !ro!ositions and contributions that
(ill enrich !hiloso!hy as a human academic disci!line (ith a dynamic African !ortal.
The term 0African’ obviously 6ualifies both the content of the !hiloso!hy that belongs
to Africans as a cultural grou! and the !hiloso!hers that have trodden the !ioneer
grounds of the disci!line (ithin and outside the continent both indigenous dias!ora or
lovers of Africa. 96ually the contributions to the debate should be com!artmentali<ed
along the core outlines dra(n from the milestones in the debate about African
!hiloso!hy that finally !uts to end a controversy that has lasted for more than five
decades. The frame(orks of these fundamentals define the intellectual tra/ectory
follo(ed by African !hiloso!hy and !hiloso!hers to have its formerly denied but
deserved !lace in the !antheon of (orld !hiloso!hy and !hiloso!hers restored back.
These fundamentals (ell ackno(ledged and defended in the (orks of such reno(ned
African !hiloso!hers such as Professors Moses Akin Makinde in his (ork 0African
Philoso!hy1 the demise of a controversy =;--,? and that of Maduabuchi Dukor=;-*;?
(hose 0Theistic Humanism of African Philoso!hy1 the great debate on substance and
method of !hiloso!hy’ attracted (orld5(ide !hiloso!hical acclaim as a landmark
contribution to African !hiloso!hical gro(th !rocess scholarshi! and debate.
These fundamentals finally laid to rest the negative as!ect of the controversy(hetherAfrican !hiloso!hy e)isted or not’ and d(elled on the !ositive as!ect of the debate55a
search and research on the determination of the true content and methodology of
authentic African !hiloso!hy. The fundamentals of African !hiloso!hy (ill focus on
this !ositive and !ro5active dimension of African !hiloso!hy (ith references to e)tant
(orks both by African 9uro!ean and other !hiloso!hers (ho have made contributions
and others (ho (ill contribute in future to the scholarshi! on African !hiloso!hy. These
fundamentals can not be re5invented or challenged and they are as follo(s1
*. The cultural origin of every !hiloso!hy or (orldvie( arising from the cultural and
meta!hysical origin and ontology of the !eo!le of a culture3
;. The ability and ca!acity of the human s!ecie to e)ercise reason the basic
instrument of human !ersonhood and !ersonality used in !hiloso!hy and other
disci!lines3
B. The e)istence of cultural and !hiloso!hical bias and !re/udice among some (orld
scholars against everything ’African’ that seeks to demonstrate the irrationality of
denying the ability to !hiloso!hi<e and its !rocesses to Africans3
E. The undeniability of the African"9gy!tian origin of current (estern Philoso!hy as
an authentic human e)!erience that forms !art of the history of !hiloso!hy3F. The end of the controversy of the e)istence or none)istence of African !hiloso!hy3
G. Demarcation of De!artments and branches of African !hiloso!hy as a!!lied
recogni<ed and !racticed globally both in Africa and other %niversities in the
(orld es!ecially other #nstitutes"centers of African $tudies1
G.* 9thics human values and religion3
G.; Philoso!hy of science and technology3
G.B Philoso!hy of language3
G.E Philoso!hy of social science and humanities
G.F African e!istemology and meta!hysics3
G.G African !ersonality and !ersonhood3
G., African social"!olitical Thought3G.> Teaching learning and researching on !hiloso!hy3
G.+ African !hiloso!hy and !hiloso!hers today3
G.*- African !hiloso!hy in global Conte)t of other !hiloso!hies3
,. &e( Areas of research interests and contributions by scholars in Africa !hiloso!hy
and the millennium challenges of humanity.
African !hiloso!hy cannot ab initio become critical !rogressive or scientific at the
same time (hen contem!orary (estern !hiloso!hy started in 8reece around the Gth
century 4.C =Dukor1 ;-*-1 )? as 0an anti6uated and dogmatic mode of thought’ (ith
0mythological e)!lanations’ that sought over time to achieve a more systemati<ed
undogmatic system called !hiloso!hy and science’. As further su!!orted by Professor
Maduabuchi Dukor’s arguments mythology emerged both as allegorical and scientific
e)!lanations used by such !hiloso!hers like Plato and 7ruiter to establish (hat later
became scientific and !ara scientific models of scientific la(s. Philoso!hy and science
!hiloso!hical trinity of 8od Man and the universe constitute the cornerstone of African
!hiloso!hy (hich he creatively e)!ressed as 0theistic humanism’. Theistic humanism is
inclusive and antici!atory of the critical coherent and scientific modeling (ith a later
gro(th !rocess and !ossibility in !hiloso!hical com!le)ity theorems hy!othesis as
African scientific !hiloso!hy. Theistic humanism is neither e)clusive nor !re/udicial to
scientific methodology the current !hase e)!ressed in contem!orary !hiloso!hy as
!hiloso!hy of science (ith all its la(s values methodology content and frame(orks.
A (ell noted by Dukor theistic humanism of African !hiloso!hy is mutually inclusive
and not !re/udicial to the 0critical in6uiring and theoretical scientific methodology of
contem!orary !hiloso!hy’. The logical link bet(een African !hiloso!hy theistic
humanism idealism em!iricism and scientific theorism as further e)!lained by
Professor Dukor is 6uite illuminating as it is !hiloso!hically e)!ository1
hat is today called African !hiloso!hy is organi<able into three thematic and cultural
themes namely 8od man and the universe. The African is an e)istentialist in res!ect of
his belief in 8od his a!!reciation of the intrinsic and e)trinsic (orth of man and the
!otentiality of the universe in its !hysical and mysterious latitudes. 4ecause of the
interrelationshi! among the conce!ts of 8od man and the universe # have conce!tuallyand materially characteri<ed African !hiloso!hy as theistic and humanistic and
secondly e)istentialist because for the African man is the measure of all things3 that
is e)istence !recedes essence an attribute and (ay of life (hich is sub/ect to
8od. African !hiloso!hy is therefore theistic humanism. This is (ithout !re/udice to
the critical en6uiry and theoretical scientific methodology of contem!orary
!hiloso!hy. 7or an authentic African !hiloso!hy to e)ist it must have a theistic
humanistic orientation u!on (hich all critical in6uiry and conce!tual analysis must
be done. #t is like em!iricism oridealism in estern !hiloso!hy. Theistic
humanism as the re!resentative doctrine of African !hiloso!hy is therefore an
amalgam of idealism and em!iricism or mythology genetic or !ara5scientific
e)!lanation of African !hiloso!hy. This cultural thematism and e)istentialism of
African !hiloso!hy called theistic humanism is hanged u!on the su!erstructure of
theism and humanism. This theory is the vie( that African literary endeavors
(orld vie( or cosmology their ontology aesthetics ethics and !olitics are
s!iritualThe African seeks to understand the religious su!erstructure of every being
and ob/ect the goal of African literature and !hiloso!hical endeavors is not
religious but humanism. Philoso!hy as a critical logical conce!tual and
starting their investigation from theistic humanism but may not retain this in the end
theory or result of their investigation logical analysis and conce!tual clarification.
3.0 Theistic humanism as the end of the reat debate and contro!ersy
The theistic humanistic orientation in African !hiloso!hy has created a dee! vista that
could o!en the creative (ells and s!rings of African !hiloso!hy and has the !otency to
generate a !ositive scholarly reactions that could be !roactive and !roductive instead of
the !ast efforts that (ere reactive and negatively un!roductive and unnecessary
argumentative. Too much effort (as (asted debating about the e)istence or non5
e)istence of African !hiloso!hy rather than !roducing scholarly !hiloso!hical tomes
from the theistic and humanistic minefields of African (isdom as evidenced by
Professor Dukor four great (orks of African !hiloso!hy the scholars (ere s!litting
heads over (hat may described as non5essentials of core !hiloso!hi<ing dra(ing a(aythe attention of scholars from the main challenges facing African !hiloso!hy1 building
the foundational systems concerning orientation frame(ork e!istemology and
methodology. The survey of the debate on is not ne( but has to do (ith the issue of
e)istence humanity and cognitive !o(er of Africans and the black !eo!le (hich
Professor Dukor=;-*-+? has also delineated as methodological1 0African !hiloso!hy
though seemingly neutral is not an o!ening of a ne( debate but an affirmation of
settled dusts over an e)istential issue3 the historical and e)istential humanity of black
!eo!le and the sustenance of the African as an e)istential com!osite being (ith
cognitive !o(er and body. This !resu!!oses a crisis from the background of African
!hiloso!hy and (hich i!so5factor necessitates a methodological a!!roach according to
this order’.
9ven though this debate at the initial stages (as seen as an argument that bordered on
the use and misuse of language it (as the idea of Professor Dukor=*-? to grou! the
!rofile of the contenders in the debate as the divergent s(ings of the arguments that
sho(ed trivial differences (hich # had observed and analy<ed in this !resent article1
The divergent s(ings of the arguments sho(ed so trivial differences that one might
have concluded that it (as mere !hiloso!hical misuse of language. &o sooner than
later k(esi (iredu began to talk of African orientation in !hiloso!hy3 (hich is
su!!osed to mean a critical a!!roach to African !hiloso!hy ancient and moderm.
#ndeed hountond/i oruka and (iredu cannot be clearly and nakedly !ortrayed as
being against African !hiloso!hy but raises fundamental 6uestions on the methodology.Peter 4odurin bluntly re/ected African !hiloso!hy in all its ramifications. 4ut in *++F
This bias made some of these (estern !hiloso!hers and Africans trained in the
analytical tradition of the (est to regard African traditional thought as non5
!hiloso!hical meaningless statements and myths =Makinde1;?. Professor Makinde then
(ondered (hy myths and allegories should be acce!table the (est as foundation stones
for the emergence of systematic and logical !hiloso!hy (hile the African myths and
beliefs should be re/ected as the necessary gro(th !rocess and !hase of an emerging
!hiloso!hical system (ith its logical and scientific categories. He further 6uestioned1
0(hat really is the difference bet(een African traditional thought and the myths (hich
Plato got from the (ritings of Homer (hich he =Plato? used to develo! some of his
!hiloso!hy that have become !art of estern !hiloso!hy. hat about Plato’s use of the
myths of 9ra Timaeus and doctrine of recollection (hich (ere used to /ustify the
transmigration and immortality of the soulJ hat if there (ere similar e)am!les in
Africa !hiloso!hical thoughtJ #t (as from the above !oint of vie( that # (oke u! to re5e)amine the !lace of traditional thought in the develo!ment of an authentic African
!hiloso!hy kno(ing fully (ell that the /ob has to start (ith meta!hysics or first
!hiloso!hy (hich is by far the most fertile area of discourse in African traditional
thoughtL.
9ven (hen the disci!linary designation changed from African traditional thought to
African !hiloso!hy it became still difficult for some of the (estern !hiloso!hy
analytical thinkers to decode the foundational authenticity of African traditional
thought myths and beliefs as the key to the construction of a future African
scientificity in !hiloso!hy a fact (hich Professor ole $oyinka =*+,>? ackno(ledged
as having the !otential of Idecoding the hidden stereoty!e of African thought system
by some (estern thinkers.’’ #nstead of concentrating u!on elaborating and building
u!on the content and categories of African !hiloso!hy the debate about its e)istence
raged on as an irony and an unnecessary !hiloso!hical s!eculation as observed
hereunder by Professor Makinde=;--,1B?1
African !hiloso!hy became a sub/ect of controversy about (hether or not there ( as an
African !hiloso!hy. My belief (as that if there (ere no African !hiloso!hy then (e must sto!
asking 6uestions about it because (e should not ask 6uestions about (hat did not e)ist on the
other hand if it e)isted then (e should sho( it by doing and (riting rather than talking about
it or engaging in endless talks about talks about.
Professor &(ala=*+,F?in the same vein has also em!hasi<ed on need for scholars to be
!ro5active and !ositive in their study and research of African !hiloso!hy1 I it is ho!ed
that (ith concerted efforts on the !art of all those keen on develo!ing the field of I
African !hiloso!hyL it may not be long before enough materials could be develo!ed for
more s!eciali<ed studies into the areaL.
".0. The #reat $ebate on African Philosophy
The definition of (hat actually constituted the great debate in African
!hiloso!hy (as a trendy thing from the *+>-s to the *++-s.#nfact Professor Timothy
&(ala=;--,1B,5EE?delivering his ;--, #naugural lecture at the %niversity of &igeria
gives a refreshing !ers!ective on this literary !hiloso!hical contention concerning the
e)istence or other(ise of African !hiloso!hy1
7or t(o decades beginning from the early seventies a ma/or !hiloso!hical debate
raged among !hiloso!hy scholars in and outside Africa concerning the e)istence nature
and sco!e of African Philoso!hy. # called it the #reat $ebate on African Philosophy
because of the consummate !assion rigor e)tensive interest generated and the vast
amount of literature that !oured out in the !rocess.#t should ho(ever be !ointed out that
this debate (as !art of the t(entieth century discourse on African Philoso!hical and
cultural identity a debate !rovoked by 9urocentric vie(s on Africa borne under
conditions of 9uro!ean colonialism .The 8reat Debate (as in fact !art of the discourse
on African culture !hiloso!hy and identity (hich a !rocess of self5reflection among
Africans since the beginning of the t(entieth century. #t (as a !rocess radically
influenced by the historical e)!eriences of slaver and colonialism (ith its
accom!anying conce!tion of African by 9uro!eans as a continent (hose !eo!le have
Icontributed little or nothing to human ideas and civili<ationL.Throughout the !eriod of
the 8reat Debate # took no active !art in it because # (as busy (riting my book on
#gbo Philoso!hy as a !aradigm of African Philoso!hy and secondly as indicated
above # had already formulated t(o courses on African Philoso!hy (hich (ere being
taught at the %niversity of &igeria and beyond . $o to me3 at the time African
!hiloso!hy (as a reality. As a !hiloso!her and a dialectical thinker for that matter #
kne( that it is only through an unfettered free reign of the critical s!irit that mankind
can educate itself on the truth about the (orld and about his actions.Ho(ever #
follo(ed the !rogression and logic of the debate noting shifting !ositions as the
debaters gained more illumination on the sub/ect O matter. At the same time develo!ing
it as a field of study (orking out its content and methodology.
Professor T.% &(ala =;--,? ne)t (ent ahead not only to affirm and demonstrate the
e)istence of African !hiloso!hy but also offered one of the most brilliant criti6ues anderrors committed by those (ho (ere involved in the debate an error (hich according
to him (as caused by the logical fallacy kno(n as 0ingnoratio elenchi’ since 0there (as
evidence of lack of ac6uaintance (ith the sub/ect O matter through concrete research
and thus inability to understand its actual dynamics’. This is the most serious !oint of
my criti6ue of the 8reat Debate and # charged the debaters of being guilty of the logical
error called #gnoratio elenchi’. Professor &(ala then outlined the logical frame(ork of
the errors committed by the debaters es!ecially those (ho had attem!ted to deny the
e)istence of African !hiloso!hy. :n the (hole he designated five erratical summons
that countered the non5e)istence argument and it is (orth(hile to give a full e)!osition
to these logical and cultural errors committed by those (ho (ould rather not acce!t the
reality of African !hiloso!hy an e)!anding and gro(ing !hiloso!hical reality (hich
Professor Dukor’s four ne( !hiloso!hical !ublications in African !hiloso!hy may have
laid to rest and brought the !ossibility of closing cha!ter on the !assionate debate that
has raged ceaselessly since the late si)ties. As argued by this (riter both in this and
other (orks Professor &(ala makes a clear case of the errors (ith the follo(ing
arguments1
# summari<ed the elements of this logical error as consisting in
i. arguing out of ignorance because he sub/ect O matter (as virtually unkno(n to
them3 ii. Arguing beside the mark and ans(ering to the (rong !oint because their
focus (as on African Traditional Philoso!hy as for e)am!le elaborated in !lacid tem!les
4antu !hiloso!hy. African Philoso!hy (as being e6uated to this strand of !hiloso!hy3
iii. There (as the further version of this error in (hat is called n logic Argumentum ad
Nerecundian. This means a!!eal to a so5 called res!ected authority in this case the
authority of (estern analytic !hiloso!hy. Traditional African !hiloso!hy being the focus
of attention (as found not meet the standards of (estern analytic !hiloso!hy and so it
(as dismissed as non.5 authentic3 iv. 96ually evident in this debate is another form of
ignoration elenchi sim!ly !ut as I&o. case abuse the !laintiff’s attorney’’. Thus
traditional African !hiloso!hy (as called I!hiloso!hy in a debased sense folk
!hiloso!hy ethno O !hiloso!hy etc3 v. 9urocentric #nfluence
The !re!onderant influence of 9urocentric educational background of the Debaters (asobvious. Most of the debaters (ere schooled in 9uro!ean rationalist and analytic
!hiloso!hy. $ome studied classics (hich inculated in them the lessons of the Aryan
Nersion of (orld intellectual history. This version credits the e(s and Hebre(s for
giving mankind religion the 2omans for la( and administration the 8reeks for
!hiloso!hy and science. All !revious civili<ations before them including 9gy!tian and
4abylonian Civili<ations (ere treated as !rimitive stages in the evolution of mankind.
Africa (as of course called the $ar% &ontinent3 vi. $tolen @egacy5#n his book. $tolen
legacy1 the 8reeks (ere not the author of 8reek Philoso!hy but the !eo!le of &orth
Africa commonly called the 9gy!tians 8eorge 8.M ames e)!osed 9uro!ean distortion
of mankind’s intellectual and social history. He reaffirmed the !ioneer role of the
9gy!tians in the evolution of science mathematics !hiloso!hy and religion. He sho(ed
ho( 9uro!eans a!!ro!riated African contributions to the develo!ment of science and
!hiloso!hy as if they (ere 9uro!ean creations *>. the same !oint (as made by martin
4anal in his seminal (ork 4lack Athena1 the Afroasiatic roots of classical civili<ation.
Nol. # the fabrication of ancient 8reece. *+ The case of hy!anthia of 9gy!t is very
interesting. $he is the first (oman !hiloso!her astronomer and mathematician yet the
authoritative random house dictionary enters her name as a 8reek (oman3;- vii. the
error in the conce!tion of African !hiloso!hy5as # have em!hasi<ed above the key error in
the conce!tion of African !hiloso!hy by the debaters arose from a number of factors key
among (hich is their ignorance and lack of ac6uaintance (ith criticism of African
!hiloso!hy arose from 1 =a?. 96uation of African !hiloso!hy (ith traditional African
!hiloso!hy3 =b?. 96uating African traditional !hiloso!hy (ith African traditional religion
=c?. Contrasting African traditional !hiloso!hy (ith science3viii. Confessions of 9)!erts
To me it (as very ins!iring (atching the great !hiloso!hers fall into avoidable
intellectual errors.
'.0. Professor $u%or(s $econstruction ) reconstruction and conition of the reat
debate in African philosophy .
Having studied and researched dee!ly on the great debate and the great issues raised in
African !hiloso!hy Professor Dukor=;--F? no( (ent ahead to deconstruct reconstruct
and redefine the foundational !rinci!les (hat should constitute African !hiloso!hy. He
first traced the !hiloso!hical tra/ectory of the debate going through the dynamics andchallenges of modernity !ost5modernity and contem!orary !hiloso!hy before the
disci!line of African !hiloso!hy (as acce!ted and taught globally1
An e)amination of the status the legitimacy the ma! the meaning and the sco!e of
contem!orary African !hiloso!hy in the debate on African !hiloso!hy amounts to (hat
# call deconstruction reconstruction and cognition of African !hiloso!hy. #n the *+F-s
and *+G-s there (as a kind of recent African !hiloso!hy (hich ho(ever did not
attract (orld recognition because it (as vie(ed as a hybrid of the religious and the
cultural rather than the im!ersonal and !ure disci!line called !hiloso!hy. This is
follo(ed by a decade’s debate (hich resulted to an ob/ective theoretical academic and
substantive African !hiloso!hy studied all over the (orld. The dusts settled on the
6uestion of African !hiloso!hy after the hitherto most cynical and ske!tical grou!s
concerning the disci!line have either tacitly acce!ted the e!istemic !otentiality
(arrant ability of black !eo!le’s !hiloso!hy or have flung the door o!en for admission
of the school of African !hiloso!hy to the hall of learning for further d iscussions and
researches on its meta!hysical and e!istemological contributions to human kno(ledge.
Mention and talk of African !hiloso!hy is no longer seen as cognitive or e!istemic
le!er or arro(head of static back(ard and ant5 kno(ledge voodoo and mysticism it
has ceased to be vie(ed (ith sus!icion and research on it is in !rogress. #t has become
a legitimate ne( field of methodological analytical and logical a!!lications. Hence
African !hiloso!hy like other disci!lines has dialectically !assed through all the
historical !hases of human evolution /ust like the (estern #ndian and Chinese
!hiloso!hies and ac6uired the inbuilt mechanism of change and res!onse to
modernity !ost5modernity and contem!orary !hiloso!hy.
Des!ite the fact that African !hiloso!hy has !assed and graduated through all the
kno(n !hases of human evolutionary though !atters and rational !rocesses of easoning
(e could still affirm and observe that contem!orary African !hiloso!hy (as declared
o!en by the debate on (hether African !hiloso!hy e)ists or not (ith contributions and
reactions leading to a ne( synthetical era of acce!tance and cognition as noted by
Dukor’s conce!tion of t(o schools of thought belo( in his comments1
The first school to emerge is of the vie( that there should be a reform of African
!hiloso!hy to accord (ith the (estern tradition so that it attains universality. Hence
iredu asserts Iuntil the last ten years or so the dominant conce!tion of African
!hiloso!hy (as of a !iece (ith the un5analytical a!!roach the 8hanaian !hiloso!her
again stated that African !hiloso!hy then (as held to be an im!licit !hiloso!hy1 it (as
the !hiloso!hy im!licit in the life thought and talk of the traditional African ethics and
morals of the society concerned. The 6uestion (hich has arisen for some contem!orary
Africans (ho are interested in e)!loiting the logical scientific and methodologicalresources of the modern (orld in their o(n !hiloso!hi<ing is (hy their efforts should
be !ut beyond the !ale of African !hiloso!hy by definition. #n the (estern !hiloso!hy
the idea of !hiloso!hy is !redicated on the same cultural subtraction as science.
Philoso!hy and science definitionally and functionally are densed (ith university.
Hence Kenyan !hiloso!her Henry :dera :ruka asserts1 :ne cannot rationally
combine a belief in the universality of !hiloso!hy (ith a belief in African !hiloso!hy. #f
!hiloso!hy is universal it a!!ears aburd to talk of African !hysics African
mathematics or African !hiloso!hy. hat (e should correctly talk about is not African
!hiloso!hy but rather African s!ecific issues in !hiloso!hy O issues and !roblem (hich
a !hiloso!her (ith an African cultural background (ould find it most necessary to
stress. 4ut such issues it is believed should not /ustify the use of such an a(kard and
academically discriminatory !hrase as IAfrican !hiloso!hy.
:n the other hand Professor Dukor labeled !hiloso!hers such as iredu Hountond/il
4odunrin and :ruka since they are the !hiloso!hers in Africa because they believe are
the lefists or the e)clusivist the monists or the universalists. The reason for labeling
them as is because 0(hile they maintain an e)treme leftist !osition there is another
#t is from the various !hiloso!hical issues in African thought (hich in many res!ects
are found com!arable to some of the !hiloso!hical isses in (estern thoughts that a
!ositive discussion on and the teaching of African !hiloso!hy may more !rofitably be
initiated. 7rom a!!ro!riate com!arison and contrast different !hiloso!hical o!inions
(ould emerge and the difference if any bet(een the underlying assum!tions and
issues in African and (estern !hiloso!hies may be discovered. 4y doing this
!hiloso!hy in general and African !hiloso!hy in !articular is not the (orse for it.
#m!licit in Makinde’s vie( and the vie(s of the inclusivists is that !hiloso!hy is a
!roduct of culture =(orldvie(? or e)tenuating social order. #n other (ords every
!hiloso!hy has a culture or (orldvie(. The scholastics in estern !hiloso!hy (ere
informed by the religious (orldvie( (hile em!iricism (as informed by the scientific
and ske!tical (orldvie(. 4ut the task of !hiloso!hy is to e)!lain and analyse cultural
and social life for !rogress. Philoso!hy is dynamic and stresses the other(ise in theconte)t of the totality and being in general. The inclusivists a!!reciate all this hence
K. C. Anyan(u asserts1
hat is today called African !hiloso!hy are organi<able into three thematic and cultural
themes namely 8od man and the increase. The African is an e)istentialist in res!ect of
his belief in 8od his a!!reciation of the intrinsic and e)trinsic (orth of man and the
!otentiality of the universe in its !hysical and mysterious latitudes. 4ecause of the
interrelationshi! among the su!remacy of 8od man and his surrounding inverse # have
conce!tually and materially characteri<ed African !hiloso!hy as Theistic and
humanism and secondly described this as e)istentialism because for the African man is
the measure of all things that is e)istence !recedes essence but an attribute and (ay
of life (hich is sub/ect to 8od almighty. African !hiloso!hy is therefore theistic
humanism. This is (ithout !re/udice to the critical in6uiry and theoretical scientific
methodology of contem!orary !hiloso!hy. 7or an authentic African !hiloso!hy to e)ist
it must have a theistic humanistic orientation and u!on (hich all critical in6uiry and
conce!tual analysis must be done. #t is like em!iricism or idealism in estern
!hiloso!hy. Theistic humanism as the re!resentative doctrine of African !hiloso!hy is
an amalgam of idealism =!ortrayed by the !icture of 8od? and em!iricism =humanism
and materialism?.
Ho(ever no matter the arguments or the side that is contributing to the debate
Professor Dukor=;-*-E>? has argued reasonably (ell and made a !oint about the
anciency and age of the !hiloso!hical e)!erience(hichaccording to himcradled and
contradiction or e6uivocation that African Philoso!hical Tradition is essentially theistic
and humanistic. :ne the essential com!onents of this !hiloso!hical tradition Professor
Dukor comes u! (ith the ideas and conce!ts of 0theistic Pan!sychism’
0anthro!omor!hism and immanenism’ 0African conce!ts of !erson man and Destiny’
0the meta!hysical nature of man’ and ’the African conce!t of Mind and 4ody’. #t is
im!ortant to note that Professor Dukor takes his time and energy to elaborate on this
conce!ts (hich flo( naturally from his theistic humanism and have the agreement and
su!!ort of other African scholars and !hiloso!hers as mentioned earlier in this article.
hat are the contentual !hiloso!hical !illars basis and e)!ository conte)ts under
(hich he defined these terms and ideas as native to African !hiloso!hical traditionJ @et
us see ho( he conceives the !athology and mor!hology of these conce!ts that flo(
from the cosmological and ontological (orld vie(s of the African1
Professor $u%or on Theistic Panpsychism,010)pp1")1"/-1':
hatever may be the nativity or origin of a !eo!le (hatever may be their stage of civili<ation
it (ould be sheer dishonesty and !re/udice to deny their !hiloso!hy. Parrinder 8eoffrey rightly
!ut is saying 0’to say that African !eo!le have no system of thought e)!licit or assumed
(ould be to deny their humanity The !hiloso!hical !hrase I# think therefore # amL a!!liesto all menL. 2eligion !ermeates every as!ect of the lives of the #gbos. &o (onder then (hy
Parrinder observes that Ithe African (ere incurably religious !eo!leL. Contrary to the early
traveler’s (ritings on African #gbo religious !ractices feasts and ceremonies cannot in all
circumstances be necessarily e6uated to magical and idolatrous !ractices or fetishism. The term
Animism can be a!!lied to #gbo !hiloso!hy and religion and African at large not because they
(orshi! or revere em!ty ob/ects but because they believe that in every being or ob/ect there is
a vital !o(er or soul. The #gbo have a tendency to !ersonify nature because they believe that
there is a s!iritual force residing in every ob/ect of nature. 4ecause of that they recogni<e and
ackno(ledge the e)istence of a $u!reme 4eing (hich they call chuk(u (hich controls and
informs all other !o(ers. The oruba of &igeria call him :lorun and the 8a of southern 8hana
call Him &yonmo. This is a consciousness that marks the (hole of African !eo!le as Theistic
Pan!sychic animistsAn ancient #gbo man believe that everything that e)ist is a force and all
forces are interrelated in a theistic !anschychic necessity. Here lies the origin of #gbo
Communalism or $ocialism. Po(ers that e)ist include the divine and human animal and !lant
good and evil. Man in #gbo belief system is a social being (ho live in im!ortant relationshi!
(ith the natural (orld. $ince the #gbos believe in the interrelation of forces material and
Professor $u%or on African concepts of person) man and $estiny
,010) pp1'")-1'':
Man and society are mutually inclusive conce!ts in virtually all cultures. &one e)ists
inde!endently of the other. # shall e)amine the conce!tion of man from the vantage !oint of its
relationshi! to society. The conce!t of man here is used as a generic term for human beings
including man and (oman and legitimi<ed by the fact that the conce!ts of !erson and destiny
are all ontological 6uestion about man as a human !erson. #t is interesting to note that almost
every conce!t in African thought is theocratic that is dense (ith religiosity. Therefore no
ade6uate understanding of African conce!t of man and society (ill suffice (ithout ade6uate
recognition of its theistic and humanistic undertones. #n African traditional thought the
meta!hysical nature of man re6uires of him some social and natural obligations (hich are
accom!lished (ith ritual. #t is called 02ites of !assages’ or 02hythms of life’3 the belief (hich
leads to eschatological beliefs in life after deaths. :n the mundane !lane man does not e)ist
alone in the universe5 he is (ith other beings. 4ut the belief in 0Destiny’ and 0Predestination’ in
African Traditional thought !resents meta!hysical !roblems. #f the conce!ts of 0destiny’ must
be retained in the le)icon of African thought then a distinction must be made bet(een it and
!redestination. Predestination so clashes (ith some fundamental African beliefs that its
e)istence as a conce!ts in African thought in !roblematic. #ssues raised here are generali<eabeon ground that (hatever obtains in t(o or more ethnic grou!s in back Africa roughly obtains in
the (hole of back Africa.
Professor $u%or on the metaphysical ature of man ,010)p.1":
African universe has been sho(n to be religious and onto theological one (ith the belief that
gods and s!irits constantly interfere in human affairs. According to . $. Mbiti the individual is
immersed in religious !artici!ation (hich starts before birth and continues after his death. 7or
him therefore and for the larger community of (hich he is !art to live is to caught u! in areligious drama. Practically everything is e)!lained and understood in terms of religion. #n a
!an!sychic sense every ob/ect rocks and so on are not em!ty ob/ects but religious ob/ects i.e.
natural !henomena are active and s!iritual forces of nature.
Professor $u%or on Mind and Body ,010)p.*:
The s!iritual com!onent of a !erson is all !ervading encom!assing and transcending. #t should
also be !ointed out here that the traditional !roblem of mind =as a mental entity? and the body
=as a !hysical entity? in (estern !hiloso!hy does not e)ist in African !hiloso!hy. This is morethan a mental !rocess (hich is that is something s!iritual3 the mind as a s!iritual !henomenon
is not located in any !art of the body but inferable from the brain. The body is the only
!hysically !erceivable entity yet (ith ontic s!iritual reality. Hence it is more a!!ro!riate to talk
of soul"s!irit and body interaction because no !roblem as such e)ist but a com!le) of s!iritual
relations (hich is still reducible to a dualistic conce!tion of !erson that is semblances of
miniature variations of more that t(o conce!tions of !erson are reducible to a dual conce!tion.
Therefore our discussion about mind and body here are actually about is cognitive e6uivalents.
&onclusion
Professor Dukor Maduabuchi=Dukor;-*-? has ascribed the !hiloso!hical dis!ute
concerning African !hiloso!hy3 the great debate on (hether it is myth ins!ired or
Anyan(u K.C.’=*+>F?!hiloso!hical significance of myth and symbol in Dogon (orld
vie(’ in C.$ Momoh.African !hiloso!hy.Does it e)istJ.Diagones.!GF
4odurin.=*+,F?.’The 6uestion of African !hiloso!hy’.Philoso!hyNol.FG*+FG*+>*!!
*G*5,+3in :dera :deku’The fundamental !rinci!les in the 6uestion of African
!hiloso!hy’ in right African !hiloso!hy $econd :rder Nol.#N &o. * !!.EE5EF.
DukorM.=;--F?. The great debate1 deconstruction reconstruction and cognition of
African !hiloso!hyL (as first !ublish in !hiloso!hical 6uarterly of #srael vol. BB
no.*E Tel5 aviv university #srael. The abstract a!!eared in !hiloso!hers inde)
vol.E-.no.B;--G of the !hiloso!hy information centre bo(ling green state university
:hio %$A !B+G =!age >?3
DukorM. =;--;?.Theistic Humanism African Philoso!hical Tradition’’ (as first !ublished in ournal of #ndia Council of Philoso!hical 2esearch Nolume Qviii
&o. B P!. E,5,G The Abstract A!!eared in Philoso!hers #nde) Nol. BG &o. ;
;--; of the Philoso!hy #nformation Centre 4o(ling 8reen $tate %niversity
:hio %.$.A. P!. *+F. Cosmological e)!lanations of life5thereafter. =Page >B?
DukorM.=;-*-?.Theistic humanism of African !hiloso!hy1the great debate on
substance and method of !hiloso!hy.@ambert !ublisherssaarbrucken8ermany.
ames 8.M.=*+>>?. $tolen @egacy1 the 8reeks (ere not the Author of 8reek
!hiloso!hy but the !eo!le of &orth Africa commonly called the 9gy!tians. $an
7rancisco. ulian 2ichardson associates !ublishers = originally !ublished in *+FE by
the !hiloso!hical library &e( ork .
K(esi .=*+,;?.’:n an African orientation in !hiloso!hy.$econd
:rderNol.*.&o.*.!!B5*B.$ee also K(esi iredu=*+,G?.’ Ho( not to com!are African
traditional thought (ith (estern thought’ in Chindaba &o.;uly"December *+,;3
Pauline.H.=*+,E?.’African !hiloso!hy1myth and reality’ in ThoughtR !ractice.Nol.*.4loominghton#ndiana %niversity Press