The Great Debate and End of Controversy

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 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

human values

*



1.0 Introduction

#n every culture each age su!!lies the ra( materials of kno(ledge used and a!!lied by

the ne)t generation to advance the content frame(ork and goal of kno(ledge

es!ecially in !hiloso!hy. The chronology of kno(ledge is very much like the gro(th of

the child to youthfulness maturity and the old age of (isdom. This historical and

meta!hysical se6uence of kno(ledge com!ared to the gro(th of the biological

!ersonality =Ka(u1 ;-->? is natural onto logical e!istemic logical and integrative in a

humanistic (ay. This !hiloso!hical se6uence has been am!ly re!licated by the

e!istemics of the great (orld religions and !hiloso!hies as an authentic !rocess of

scholarly gro(th and e)!ansion. Therefore it is sim!ly !re!osterous irrational

irritating and un!hiloso!hical to deny African !hiloso!hy its share of traditional

mythology symbology and religious (orld5vie(s as the essential humanistic

foundations and com!onent of its evolving and maturing !hiloso!hical consummation.

This irrationality and !osition fundamentally flies a(ay in the the light of the

!hiloso!hical and canonical e)!ositions !rofiled by Professors Maduabuchi Dukor’s

theistic and humanistic basis /ustification and affirmation of the e)istence of African

!hiloso!hy. Theistic humanism is a!!ro!riately ca!tured and defined by him as an

authentic conce!t doctrine and rigorous method (hich hel!s to document this

!hiloso!hical historicity traditional !recedence and ontological se6uence in the search

for global !hiloso!hical e)!ansion. Professors Dukor =;-*-1i)? builds this !oignant

thesis (hen he makes the follo(ing observations about the natural gro(th from myth to

systematic !rocess of the 9uro!ean of !hiloso!hical civili<ation and em!irical gro(th a

gro(th and e)!ansion much akin to that of African !hiloso!hy (hich is moving a(ay

from myth and religious allegories to an intensive rational scientific and systematic

!rocess of e!istemic gro(th and e)!ansion1

;



Theistic humanism is a conce!t or doctrine designating the African inclusive idea of

man 8od and the universe hence the theism and humanism are both categories of

African !hiloso!hy. African !hiloso!hy so defined renders the religious (orld5vie(

myths and symbols as rational and coherent system as (ell as constituting a material or

fabric for !hiloso!hical enter!rises much so3 there is also evidence of myths and

symbols in the history of (estern !hiloso!hy. The !eriod called the 0Age of 4elief’ had

!hiloso!hers like $t Thomas A6uinas Dons $cotus and illiam of :ckam =medieval

!hiloso!hers?. The 0Age of 2eason’ =*,th century !hiloso!hers? had 4acon Paschal

Hobbes 8alileo Descartes $!ino<a and @eibni<. The 0Age of 9nlightment =*>th

century !hiloso!hers? had 4erkley @ocke Hume and so on. The 0Age of #deology’ or

*+th century !hiloso!hers had Kant Hegel Comte Mill Mar) and &iet<sche and so

on. And the 0Age of Analysis’ or the ;-th century !hiloso!hers had Pierce hitehead

Hume De(ey 2ussell ittgenstein $artre and so on. #f this historical sketch is

anything to go by (e (ould notice that (hat the medieval !hiloso!hers in the 0Age of

4elief 0 (ere doing (as (hat African !hiloso!hy in the beginning (as !racticing as

!hiloso!hy. ust as the mythological era in (estern !hiloso!hy !rovided material for

!hiloso!hi<ing in the ancient and medieval !eriod so also the mythological era in

African !hiloso!hy !rovided material for Tem!les Kagam’s and Mbiti’s (orks. :n the

other hand (hat the *>th century !hiloso!hers in the 0Age of 9nlightment (ere doing

is (hat the neo5!ositivists or neo5Platonists =in the mud sense? in African !hiloso!hy

like !eter 4odurin K(esi iredu Pauline Hounton/i (ere !ro!agating. This school of

thought in African !hiloso!hy is indirectly also calling for the analytical a!!roach to

African !hiloso!hy.

Having analy<ed Professor Dukor’s observable !arallel bet(een the origin gro(th and

e)!ansion 8reek"9uro!ean !hiloso!hy and that of African !hiloso!hy the un/ustified

denial of African !hiloso!hy its authentic e)istence as a !hiloso!hical homunculus of

the Africans striving for ontological cosmological and e!istemic inter!retation of his

cultural environment is a mere e)ercise in irrational !re/udice and un/ustified racial bias

against a !eo!le their culture and !hiloso!hy. #t (ill be more !hiloso!hically creative

and !roductive to at this !oint design the outline and content of a !hiloso!hical

tem!late that (ould hel! scholars to systematically construct contribute and build the

institution and science of African !hiloso!hy.

;.- The Philosophical Template for African Philosophy--an #ntroduction to the

controversy issues culture and fundamentals of African Philoso!hy

The e)istence or other(ise of the conce!t disci!line or course of study kno(n as

0African !hiloso!hy’ has generated a global regional and national debate among

scholars of African origin non African origin and others (ith interests related to Africa

B



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

E



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

F



(ere born in the 8reek (orld around si)th century. Then !hiloso!hers (ere an)ious to

substitute an anti6uated and dogmatic mode of thought mythological e)!lanations for

a more systemati<ed undogmatic system called !hiloso!hy and science. $ocrates and

Plato did not hesitate in critici<ing the old mythological religions and their gods. 4ut

ironically Plato’s 2e!ublic (as !unctuated (ith mythological elements. 2eferring to

the 2e!ublic 7ruiter dra(s a distinction bet(een myths as allegories as genetic

e)!lanation and as !ara scientific e)!lanation. 8enetic e)!lanation is the account of

creation in Timaeus (hile !ara scientific e)!lanations are the account of a future life

and the re(ards and !unishment for virtue given in the 2e!ublic 8eorgia’s Phaedo and

Pheadrus.

Therefore the mythological and allegorical dimensions of African !hiloso!hy is a

necessary gro(th !hase (hich all (orld !hiloso!hies including (estern !hiloso!hy

!assed through as a sto!5ga! and ste!!ing stones to a more logical systematic and

scientific maturation and gro(th. The myths beliefs and allegories embedded in African

!hiloso!hy are foundational and su!!ortive of a more coherent systematic and

contem!orary !hase of !hiloso!hical com!le)ity. Philoso!hical gro(th and

develo!ment moves from the sim!ly to the com!le) from the mythological to the

scientific from tradition to modernity from the sub/ective to the ob/ectives and the

incor!oreal to the cor!oreal. African !hiloso!hy is therefore gro(ing maturing and

e)!anding as the African !ersonality makes sense of inter!rets and seeks to e)!lain his

e)istential e)!eriences (hich he encounters daily in his environment and (orld. This

inter!retation made !ossible (ith the hel! of his myths allegories religions and values

becomes more organi<ed systematic coherent and scientific (ith timemoving from

e!istemic !hiloso!hy to institutional and measurable scientificity.

Accordingly it is this human and value based !hiloso!hy of the African !ersonality

Professor Maduabuchi Dukor e)!resses in African !hiloso!hy as the core three

thematic and cultural themes namely 8od Man and the universe =Dukor?.This

G



!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

,



scientific enter!rise has humanism as its goal too. African theistic humanism is

a (orld vie( and could be a scientific vie( for that matter.

#t is therefore logically demonstrable that the goals of African !hiloso!hy and (estern

!hiloso!hy being theistic humanistic are similar and mutually inclusive at that !oint. To

the e)tent that African humanism and its theistic foundations /oined together to

establish the e!istemological meta!hysical su!erstructure of African !hiloso!hy to that

e)tent must scholars accede African !hiloso!hy its imagine mythology content

frame(ork from (hich it dra(s all the ra( materials for the gro(th develo!ment and

e)!ansion of its !hiloso!hy as an authentic !hiloso!hy (ith global res!ect. African

!hiloso!hy like estern !hiloso!hy is concerned (ith en6uiry into the truth of things

are conce!tual logical and critical clarification of conce!ts. Thus the fact that theistic

humanism is a frame(ork as advanced by Professor Dukor to e)!lain the (orld vie(

orientation attitude and values that defines secures and stabili<es the African search for

truth concerning 8od his true self and his universe is huge conce!tual frame(ork that

constitutes a methodological lea! that could be utili<ed to build a clarificatory

analytical and em!irical future su!erstructure for African !hiloso!hy. #n that sense

Professor Dukor has ended the controversy (eeded it of irrelevancies and fertili<ed the

roots of African scholarly and !hiloso!hical gro(th and e)!ansion. &one should

misinter!ret the heuristic and methodological !ossibilities of the orientational

foundation of theistic humanism. Again this !oint is (ell articulated by Professors

Dukor =)i?1

African theistic humanism is a (orld ne( and could be a scientific vie( for that

matter. #t must be em!hasi<ed that theistic humanism is not the goal of African

!hiloso!hy nor (ill any !hiloso!hy (hatever has any ideological goal by

definition. The goal of !hiloso!hy and African !hiloso!hy is investigation into the

truth of things via conce!tual logical and critical clarification of conce!ts. Any

other goal is a fall5out from this. Theistic humanism of African !hiloso!hy is not a

goal but the orientation of African !hiloso!hy. Contem!orary !rofessional

!hiloso!hers must !reserve the authenticity of Africans of African !hiloso!hy by

>



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

+



at $.$ Peter and Paul $eminary #badan in &igeria he recanted his vie(s and /oined the

already over!acked hall of African !hiloso!hy. The other grou! (ho # call the

inclusivists or the iberalists acce!ted both the critical canons of !hiloso!hical discourse

as (ell as the semblance of this in African aboriginal thoughts (hich they insist much

not be discarded merely because it is not (estern. Today the confluence of these

tributaries of African !hiloso!hy is seen in the modern African !hiloso!hy (hich is

sub/ect to critical and scientific e)amination.

Professors Makinde =;--,1*? in his book 0African !hiloso!hy. The end of the

controversy has made the follo(ing observations about this diversionary and un5

substantial as!ect of the debate concerning African !hiloso!hy1

4et(een *+,F and *+>F the teachings !ublications and discussions on African

!hiloso!hy (ent on in African universities. 7or (hatever reasons the issues discussed

(ere not clearly labeled as African !hiloso!hy. They (ere called African traditional

thought. #t (as this idea of African traditional thought that led to a serious controversy

as to (hether or not African traditional thought could !ass as African !hiloso!hy.

Hence there (ere many !a!ers (hich !ointed at !hiloso!her’s ske!ticism about the

e)istence of African !hiloso!hy. &otable among them are the follo(ing1 9.A 2uch I#s

there an African !hiloso!hy second order vol.*** &o. ; *+,E Henri Maurier IDo (e

have African !hiloso!hyJ’’ in 2ichard A. right. ed. African !hiloso!hy &e( ork1

The 7ree Press *+GF!!.EG-5E,; H. :dera :ruka IMythologies as African !hiloso!hyL thought and !ractice1 an east African ournal vol + :ctober *+,; and

I7undamental Princi!les in the uestion of Africa !hiloso!hy second order vol iv

*+,F. Paul Hountond/i IAfrican !hiloso!hy1 Myth and 2eality thought and !ractice

vol. # *+,E and an e)!anded version African !hiloso!hy1 Myth and 2eality.

4loomington3 #ndiana university !ress *+>B K(esi iredu IHo( not to com!are

African traditional thought (ith (estern thought IChindaba &o. ;

uly"December *+,G and 2ichard A. righted’s 0’#nvestigating African

!hiloso!hy’’ in 2ichard A. righted. ed. above !!. E*5FG #t (as not until

*+,> that # (oke u! from my dogmatic slumber. That (ake u! call (as

occasioned by Professor Horton’s article entitled ITraditional thought and the

emerging African !hiloso!hyL !ublished in the second :rder vol. N# &o * *+,, !!

*G,5*G

The slumber that Professor Akin Moses Makinde (oke u! from (as caused by the bias

occasioned by influence of logical !ositivism and analytical frame(ork that informed

the non5acce!tance of African traditional thought as a !hiloso!hy (ith its o(n right.

*-



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

*B



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

*E



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

*F



grou! at the e)treme right (ith some minority of the center (ing it must be stated that

the substance of the debate is !redicated on the 6uestion of African !hiloso!hy and the

method. K.c. Anyan(u 9mmanuel 9<e innocent :nyen(enyi @ucius outla( $o!hie

:lu(ole o. $odi!o k(ame 8yekye C.4. :kolo C.$. momoh etc are on the right of

the debate hence they leads advocacy for African !hiloso!hy’. K.C. Anyan(u=*+>F?

says that those (ho seek to determine (hat a !hiloso!hy is (ith one and only one

definition are mistaken. Hence he argues that1 0most !eo!le (ho ask about the

definition of !hiloso!hy find out that different !hiloso!hers give different definitions of

it and that innumerable definitions of !hiloso!hy seem to betray the !references of

each !hiloso!her and to sho( the im!ossibility of offering a sim!le definition of

!hiloso!hy or of having one !hiloso!hy acce!table to all men in all cultures and at all

timesL it can be said therefore that there are !hiloso!hies and not a !hiloso!hy and that

no matter ho( authoritative any definition of !hiloso!hy may be or ho( reno(ned is its

!rofounder it can never serve as an absolute standard for determining the validity of all

other !hiloso!hies’

2everend Chuk(udum :kolo=*++B?one of the veterans of the debate and a versatile

research in the field of African !hiloso!hy started his o(n contribution by stating

categorically that there is African !hiloso!hy because it is !hiloso!hy based on African

e)!erience and (orld vie( of Africans. He arguments are that1

0African !hiloso!hical thinking like the #ndian Chinese (estern etc. !hiloso!hical thinking is

one of the many modes of !hiloso!hi<ing or critically analy<ing and inter!reting reality as

different !eo!le races and cultures vie( it. #n African !hiloso!hy therefore the !hiloso!her

reflects and concentrates on African reality on the African his role and !lace in it and not on

reality as such nor on ism in the abstract.

According to him one does not have to characteri<e African !hiloso!hy and its

!hiloso!hical !rocess as either folk or !hiloso!hical sagacity or indeed any other kind

of !ossible sagacity. The grou! (ho (ants to affirm the e)istence of African

!hiloso!hy but (ould (ant it /ustified !erha!s by (estern 9uro!ean canonical

methodology are marginal as argued by Dukor.Professor Dukor names Professor

Mankinde as belonging to this grou! (ho (anted the African !hiloso!hical !rocess to

be in conformity to the (ays of the (est so that it could be a!!reciated and recogni<ed

by the (estern !hiloso!hers. Thusthis argument of a universal canon that must be

a!!lied to African !hiloso!hy. Hence Makinde=;--F? argues that1

*G



#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

*,



trained other (estern !hiloso!hers (ho gave birth to the !hiloso!hy (e kno( as

(estern !hiloso!hy. He maintains this by saying that1

0it must be !ointed out that all evidence !oint to the ancient African or 9gy!tian civili<ation

and that the cradle of mankind or civili<ation could logically im!ly the cradle of !hiloso!hy

though it may not be a critical !hiloso!hy as the !hiloso!hy of the ancient 8reece the

2enaissance or the contem!orary times. #t is also argued that ma/or !re5$ocratic 8reek

Philoso!hers and $cientists such as Thales Ana)imenses Pythagonas 9m!odocles

Democritus =the atomist? Plato and Herodtus had to come to study in African before they felt

6ualified enough to start their o(n schools in a very direct and documented (ay. Hence the

assertion that African !hiloso!hy gave birth to estern !hiloso!hy science technology and

historical thought. History has it that Herodotus vo(ed to record the great and remarkable deeds

of the 8reeks and non58reeks so the they (in the reno(n they deserve Prof. Toaboan @iyoan

never hesitated to assert that it is on the basis of this that the 8reeks !ublici<ed African

achievements too and elaborated on them. According to a book the 0$tolen @egacy’ by 8eorge

8.M. ames’ the 8reek Philoso!hy is the stolen 9gy!tian !hiloso!hy. There (as nothing called

8reek !hiloso!hy instead the ancient 9gy!tians had develo!ed a very com!le) religious

system called the Mysteries (hich (as also the first system of salvation 8.M. ames !rocreated

a gra!hic !icture and account of ho( the 8reeks !lundered the 9gy!tian civili<ation. The

8reeks had the singular o!!ortunity of ac6uiring the 9gy!tian education first though the Persian

invasion and secondly through the invasion of Ala)ander the 8reat.

*.0. Professor $u%or)+umanism) Theism: African Philoso!hical Tradition and its

content

#n !hiloso!hy humanism as a conce!t signifies the ideological focus on the human

being and the !roblems of man in the society.#t (ill be a mistake ho(ever to

identify the humanism in Professor Dukor’s theism as the humanism of the

materialistic mold that concentrates on /ust the solution of (orld as!irationsdreams

and goals of man and his society.That mistake should not be made because the

!hiloso!hical (orld vie( evoked and invoked by theistic humanism generates a

different kind of emanci!atory a!!roach.This has to do (ith the solution of not /ust

the (orldly but also the !roblems of man beyond the earth that raises the value

threshold of man’s values beyond the ken of materialism and starts a ne( other5

(orldly conscious. This much (as agreed to by Dukor =,G?1

A !hiloso!hy is called humanistic (hen it centres round man and his !roblems.

$cientific or atheistic humanism therefore consists in the as!irations urges and ca!acities of

man and they have to be given the fullest but limited e)!ression. :n the other hand s!iritual or

theistic humanism asserts that man is not fully satisfied (ith the attainment of these (orldly

*>



goals. #t as!ires for and becomes conscious of the beyond it goes beyond the !hysical and

mechanical level and enters into a s!iritual level. $o in s!iritual or com!rehensive humanism

both ty!es of as!irations both !hysical and s!iritual have to be taken into account. #t is this

sense that the contem!orary African !hiloso!hy is Theistic humanism (hich goes beyond the

!rece!ts and !ostulate of atheistic humanism. Humanism im!lies all values of life like Truth

4eauty and 8oodness etc. hence it ackno(ledges all contributions to(ards truth beauty

goodness etc. #n this sense it is accommodative of science and literature.>-

Theistic humanism

im!lies and !ostulates that truth beauty goodness and standard of values (ere !erfect creations

of 8od the !erfect being and author of !erfect.

Thus the humanism is Professor Dukor maintains and sustains the s!iritual origin of

material and societal values. This is because the theism of 8od and the humanism of

man are dialectically and holistically connect and related. :ne cannot do (ithout the

other3 one flo(s from one and goes back to it in a !hiloso!hically circuitous manner.

Thus Dukor reconnects 8od to man in a constructive creative and !roductive sense

(hich gives African !hiloso!hy a value threshold and content that makes meaning in its

e!istemology and methodology. Thus nothing humanistic could be so if it is antithetical

to the good and betterment of the human race. These !oints had been made clearer by

Dukor=,+? in the follo(ing reasoning that makes even finer distinction bet(een $ellers’

humanism and a!!roaches nearer to that of 2a/khanna1

4ut humanisms (ithout Theisms lose more than half of its value and no genuine

humanism id !ossible (hich does not go beyond mere humanism i.e. to be really

human man must have his beginning and end in 8od5 Humanity and deity are

inse!arable related. The 6uestion is (hether all humanism is o!!osed to

su!ernaturalism or Divine &atural Cosmology is inclusive of the s!iritual element in

human nature (hich is the source and ground for all human values. #n theistic

Humanism the s!iritual element is the source of human values. 2a/khanna argues that

humanism must have faith in human values. According to her $ellers regards s!iritual

to be the ground of all values but he also goes (rong in his vie( of the s!iritual he

naturali<es the s!iritual. 4ut the s!iritual the basis of values must be different from

values themselves and that must be either amenable to reason or sensory e)!erience or

it is not. #f it is not 0the s!iritual’ hangs loose in $ellers Humanism (hich is essentially

scientific. et $ellers indirectly has to recogni<e the mysterious’ in another form. All

Humanism is (edded to the cause of human values and it cannot admit anything (hich

is destructive of human values.

*+



#n other (ords Professor Maduabuchis’ thesis is that !hiloso!hy must redefine

humanism (ith values that re informed by theism as the basis of !hiloso!hical en6uiry

motivation and !ractice. The kno(ledge that is !roduced by !hiloso!hy must be

kno(ledge that serves the good of man and betterment of the globe. The !rinci!al

!ro!ositions of his humanism theistic =Dukor>;? that could serve the as!irations of

mankind are delineated by him 6uite succinctly as follo(s1

Humanistic motivation of !hiloso!hical en6uiry and the value5basis of kno(ledge and reality

are the stand5!oints by (hich !hiloso!hy (ill have to s!eak the truth. #n other (ords

!hiloso!hy (ill have to enter into the moulds of humanism in order to be an effective force (ith

the modern man. Hence the basis of humanism can be !redicated on the follo(ing !ro!ositions1

a. Philoso!hy is a systematic and universal disci!line of effective thinking about man and

the %niverse.

b. Philoso!hy (ill have to derive much from all kinds of e)!eriences so far as they are

amenable to a rational inter!retation.

c. The em!hasis in !hiloso!hy should shift from e)istence man and his values (hich

constitute the ultimate motivation of !hiloso!hic en6uiry.

d. Nalues are to be based u!on universal and ob/ective standards and !ositive self5validity.

Human nature itself is a !ositive and ob/ective ground of values rather +G but there must

be a su!erhuman element as the referent !oint or the ground rule of values.

The argument about African !hiloso!hy according to Dukor arose in the first !lace

because those involved (ere 6uarrelling (hether to a!!ly the term 0!hiloso!hy’ as

used by the (est in describing evry other !hiloso!hy outside the (estern

hemis!here. This is !roblematic because the (est have also 6uarreled about using

the term !hiloso!hy (hen it comes to describing the !hiloso!hical e)!erience and

!rocess native to the Chinese and the #ndians before they (ere eventually acce!ted

and integrated into the global !hiloso!hical tradition1

0The term 0!hiloso!hy’ is used only in the conte)t of the tradition of the ancient 8reeks as

develo!ed in the (estern civili<ation hence there has been a controversy regarding the

e)istence of (hat is called 0African Philoso!hy’. $imilarly estern trained !hiloso!hers

have re/ected the a!!lication of the term 0!hiloso!hy’ to Darshana =#ndian !hiloso!hy? and

Chinese !hiloso!hy. The #ndians and the Chinese have had a long history of (ritten

tradition of !hiloso!hical (orld5vie(s embodying their moral ontological and

cosmological e)!lanations of life5here and life hereafter.et Africa has had a mi) of the oral

and (ritten traditions in different !laces of the continent and different times.

The benchmark and frame(ork for African !hiloso!hical tradition defines the

e!istemology methodology and a!!lications that dra( directly and indirectly from

Professor Dukor’s conce!t of 0theistic humanism’. Thus one could say (ithout fear of

;-



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

;*



s!iritual their !hiloso!hy can be described as amalgam of materialism and idealism. According

to Parrinder African !hiloso!hy Isees in man a living !o(er the greatest of all created

beingsL 4ut man is de!endent on 8od and the #gbo conce!t of 8od is !ragmatic and

ontological. They believe in the authentic e)istence of 8od. To them e)istence is a necessary

and essential attribute of 8od. 4ut their a!!roach and understanding of divinities and gods

de!rived these categories of necessary e)istence but attribute to them !ossible e)istences

necessarily created by the su!reme 8od. They are all the conse6uences of the !otential acts of

8od. They believe the 8od is not an abstract being but a real and e)!erienced being too.

Professor $u%or on Anthropomorphism and Immanenism

,010) pp. 1'")-1'':

The #gbos have a clear conce!t of 8od. They believe that the $u!reme 4eing is a reality. Their

conce!tion of 8od is usually reflected in the names they give themselves and their children.

These names have religious !hiloso!hical and historical reference to 8od. 7or instance

Maduabuchi =man is not 8od? Chuk(udi =there is 8od? etc. Also Africa names of 8od reveal

the !eo!le’s e)!erience and regard of him for instance Chuk(u =#gbo? :lodumare =oruba?

&yame =Akan? etc. they came about these names through their reflections on the necessities of

the $u!reme 4eing. Although stories related to us by myths say that the su!reme deity Chuk(u

has retired to the sky the #gbos believe that 8od is ever !resent in their midst. The lesser gods

are channel through (hich 8od is a!!roached. African conce!ts of 8od and es!ecially that of

the #gbos are a solace to man in the face of the evils in the (orld. This is because as (e have

seen in one of the myths god has retired to a distant !lace living the affairs of the (orld under

the authority of the lesser gods and divinities. 8od remotely control the affairs of the (orld

through the lesser goods. $ome forces are believed by the #gbos to be manifestations of 8od’s

!o(er and they are often !ersonified as divinities. #t could be recalled that some scholars

described African culture as having degenerated from monotheism to !olytheism. 7or one thing

the #gbos for e)am!le still (orshi! and ackno(ledge the e)istence of one su!reme deity.

$econdly in a !olytheistic manner they revere and ackno(ledge the e)istence of gods and

divinities =forces and !o(ers? (hich they believe are channels of a!!roach to the almighty

8od. Thirdly African culture seems to be more !ragmatic and obliging in the sense that the

society and the individuals are al(ays under the surveillance of the gods (ho are believed to be

al(ays in the midst of the !eo!le. The Africans are unlike some Christians and Muslems (ho

believe in the 8od (ho is so highly mystified that one cannot reconcile Him and the evils in the

(orld. #n #gbo culture evil caused by man by u!setting the relation bet(een man god and 8od.

#n African !hiloso!hy there is both the anthro!omor!hic and immanent conce!tions of 8od.

Theologians and (riters tend to em!hasis only the former in order to seek its /ustification from

the (estern theories and frame(ork. The ontological reason and /ustification for the #gbo

anthro!omor!hic and immanent conce!t of 8od is sim!ly because of its !an!sychic animisticsu!erstructure.

;;



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

;B



colored to be 0’a misuse of the language of 0!hiloso!hy’ and a language game (hich

certainly talks of one and only one thing that is that African !hiloso!hy e)ist but that

it has to start critically for the religious (orld5vie( of the African’. 7or even though

that the 0e)clusivist school cannot deny the relevance of myths in the study of African

!hiloso!hy’ at the same time 0they are fully a(are that the ancient 8reek !hiloso!hy is

!unctuated (ith myths for instance in Plato’s 2e!ublic 8eorgias Phaedo and

Phaedrus’. As he further !ointed about the (orks of early 8reek !hiloso!hersthey

a!!lied myths as a ste!!ing stones and foundation to the construction of their

!hiloso!hy and (hat later became (estern !hiloso!hy1

#n these (orks you see allegories and !rescientific e)!lanations of the universe and yet they

are !hiloso!hies. The relevance of myth or religious (orld vie( as a source of material for

!hiloso!hic reflection is admitted by the e)clusivist school or the logical neo !ositivists and

!hiloso!hic criticism and reflection on the religious vie( is acce!ted by the inclusivist school

or ethno5!hiloso!hers. $o the debate is a mere language game that confuses !rioriti<ation of

either criticism or myth (ith !hiloso!hy (hen in actual fact !hiloso!hy demands that they be

!laced in dialectical and historical !ers!ective. Peter 4odunrin argues that not all rational

logical and com!licated conce!tual systems are !hiloso!hical. 4ut the goal of any !hiloso!hical

enter!rise =a critical !hiloso!hy in 4odunrin’s sense? is rationality and therefore if any system

rigorously strives to achieve that goal then it is !hiloso!hical. And !hiloso!hy in dialectical and

historical sense demands a movement from one stage of rationality to another in obedience to

changing circumstances. hat is ratinal today may not be rational tomorro( since that is

al(ays the case criticism and revision as demanded bythe logical neo !ositivists become

necessary. #n African !hiloso!hy the Paul 2adin’s Autochthonous intellectual class and 8ordon

Hornings Princi!le of synthesis set the machinery in motion for self5criticism and revision. And

illiam Abraham’s distinction bet(een !rivate and !ublic as!ects of African !hiloso!hy sho(s

that the !ublic as!ect is a critici<ed revised and harmoni<ed as!ect of individual and !rivate

!hiloso!hies of the Autochonous intellectual class. Therefore the rationality of any system in an

age is the !hiloso!hy of that age. ou cannot refute a myth because as soon as you treat it as

refutable you do not treat it as a myth but as a hy!othesis or historyL. $o the :gu !eo!le are not

under illusion about their belief in angbto. The origin or their belief (as in their (onder and

curiosity about the origin of the universe. The rationality involves here is (hat K.C. Anyan(u

calls the logic of aesthetics (hile formal logic deals (ith and results to abstractions logic of

aesthetics is the unity and meaningfulness of individual’ and community’s e)!eriences in life.

@ucy Mair and 2aymond firth may therefore be (rong in describing religious’ as irrational

unless if they (ere using (estern scientific methodology as their !arameter of rationality.

%niversality and rationality are an im!ortant ob/ect of !hiloso!hy. $o ho( rational and

universal is symbol in !hiloso!hyJ $ymbols in African culture have no s!ecial significance

;E



e)ce!t on the basis of Myths. $o to establish the !hiloso!hical significance of symbols and

vice5versa symbols can be sim!ly defined as ob/ects (ords language and sounds (hich more

often than not have esoteric meanings. The symbols can be sim!ly defined as ob/ects (ords

language and sounds (hich more often than not have esoteric meanings. The symbols in

angbeto cult therefore com!rises of rituals rites sacred (ords and names cult and magical

!ractices. 2ituals and rites are symbols because esoteric (orld and language are the backbone

of occult and magical !ractices5All (ords are s!iritual nothing is more s!iritual that (ords

%nless (e fully reali<e the !rofound influence of su!erstitions concerning (ords (e shall not

understand the fi)ity of certain (ides!read linguistic habits (hich still vitiate even the most careful

thing=Dukor*E>1$!ino<a.as 6uoted by H.C.K?

Contem!orary 9uro!ean arrogance and !ride had been !unctuated and e)cessively

im!licated in the (ell !roven theory and fact of the stolen legacy of African cultural

heritage and !hiloso!hy=Dukor*EF?.More so various scholars such as &(ala

Makinde ames 8.C Henry :leka :nye(uenyi :kafor and Dukor have !roven and

vigorously demonstrated that 0(hat (e call 8reek or (estern !hiloso!hy has its origin

in &orth Africa and 9gy!t=Africa?’.Again Professor Dukor has also stated that 0(hat

accounted for the ascendance of (hat is today called 9uro!ean culture and !hiloso!hy

is the !rogress of civili<ation from ancient Africa (hich included 9gy!t through 8reece

to 9uro!e3 that each civili<ation flourished and gave birth to a better civili<ation and

died’. Therefore (e can safely say that the African !roblem is the challenge of creating

the environment to enable a more stable scientific !roductive and creative scholarshi!

to rediscover the true essence of the African identity !ersonality culture and

!hiloso!hy by building u!on Professor Dukor Maduabuchi’s theistic humanism. This

stable environment of scholarshi! (ill em!o(er the African !hiloso!her and scholars to

discover more thresholds e)!and the e)isting find Africa’s !hiloso!hical mission in

culture and creatively contribute to(ards the solution of the myriad !roblems of

humanity a!!lying consistently the core human values dra(n from the theistic

humanism of African !hiloso!hy as redefined by Professor Dukor.That is the !ath of

African renaissance in the global village in the ne( Millenium.

;F



2eferences

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

;G



Makinde=*+>>?.African !hiloso!hyculture and traditional medicineAthens.:hio

%niversity !ress.!!*F5;*

Makinde M.A.=;--,?.African !hiloso!hy1 the end of a controversy.:bafemi A(olo(o

university !ress #le5ife &igeria3

Martin 4.=*+>,?. 4lack Athena1 the Afroasiatic 2oots of Classical Civili<ation. Nol. *the 7abrication of Ancient 8reece @ondon 7ree Association 4ooks.

Mbiti.$.=*+,-?.African religion and !hiloso!hy&e( ork1Double DayR

com!any*+,-3

&(alaT5= ;* %&9$C: teaching and research in !hiloso!hy1 Africa %&9$C: Paris

*+>E!.>-.;; %&9$C: o!. cit. !. ;GG

&(ala T. =;--,?. The Otonti Nduka Mandate: From Tradition to Modernity.*>th

inaugural lecture of the %niversity of &igeria &sukka delivered on March*F &sukka

&igeria %niversity of &igeria Press. P!.B,5EE

&(ala T. %.=;--E?. I $chools of thought in Thought in African !hiloso!hy1 a critical

2ievie(L %che ournal of the De!artment of Philoso!hy1 a Critical &igeria &sukka vol

*-.!! *5*E.

The 2andom House College Dictionary=*+,F? 2evised 9dition &e( ork!!.GF*.

iv. making literacy a condition for !hiloso!hy *3

%&9$C: teaching and research in !hiloso!hy1 Africa %&9$C: Paris *+>E!.>-

;; %&9$C: o!. cit. !. ;GGs

The Great Debate and End of Controversy

Documents

Transcript of The Great Debate and End of Controversy