Introducing African philosophy

By Dr. Bekele Gutema

What is philosophy? Does it have an absoluteness about it or can there be varieties of thought such as ‘European’ or ‘African?’ Who has the moral, academic or other authority to determine what constitutes truth, be it philosophical or historical? These are just a few of the mighty questions raised and answered in this Capital Focus column, contributed by Dr. Bekele Gutema who is the head of the Department of Philosophy, AAU. The text is an excerpt of a lecture given at the ‘Philosophy Forum’, held at Goethe-Institut Gebrekristos Desta Center, Tuesday March 6, 2007.

It is difficult to find one definition of philosophy up on which many could agree. There are various definitions of philosophy including the etymological one, which means that philosophy is the love of wisdom. Starting with that, at different times philosophers tried to define philosophy depending among other things, on concrete historical situations, class interests, social, economic and other preferences. What makes defining philosophy difficult is not the absence of a definition but rather the multiplicity of definitions given by nearly all the important philosophers. Nearly none of the important philosophers in the West agreed on just one definition of philosophy, although it is clear that what each one of them did was more or less the same thing.
The same story is true of African philosophy It is in the midst of these that we have to try to provide some provisional, working definition of African philosophy.
An array of texts (both oral and written) treating the different aspects of African reality from all possible philosophical perspectives and dealing with all the possible branches of philosophy such as metaphysics, epistemology, moral philosophy and others can be said to be African philosophy.
The year 1945 occupies a special place in the history of African philosophy since the publication of Bantu Philosophy by P. Tempels in this year became a starting point for the proliferation of literature on African philosophy.
Over the last several decades African philosophy has made a significant progress. According to the late H. O. Oruka of the University of Nairobi African philosophy may be constituted by four major trends, viz. ethnophilosophy, national - ideological philosophy, sage philosophy and professional philosophy. Here we will be concerned with Professional philosophy and its tasks.
In African philosophy, the term professional Philosophy is given to the philosophy done by those who have had a formal education in philosophy. The name professional philosophy may not exactly tell the essence of this category of philosophy, except that it is academic philosophy mainly done in universities. Apart from this, those who practice it cannot be characterized in terms of just a philosophical school. Philosophers in the group have a wide variety of orientations ranging from Marxism through analytical philosophy to existentialism and pragmatism.
They are essentially professional philosophers that have been able to advance the debate on African philosophy. Originally African philosophy was dominated by the debate on whether African philosophy exists or not. Historically this had to be done since the established occidental philosophical tradition would not recognize African philosophy. Hence considerable efforts had to be exerted to convince the established tradition about the existence of African philosophy. At times it looked as if the African philosophers were pleading in front of Western philosophers for legitimacy.
It was after a long debate that many African philosophers realized that there is no point in wasting time on the debate. For one thing, the debate itself produced a rich array of philosophical texts demonstrating the existence of African philosophy. Additionally if one considers the socio-economic, political and cultural situation in Africa, one finds an innumerable variety of issues worthy of philosophical reflection. This makes it possible to do African philosophy. That is how, eventually, the question about the existence/nonexistence of African philosophy became superfluous.
Professional African philosophy is characterized like any other philosophy by a critical and rational approach to some of Africa’s pressing problems, although it does not exclude the topics within the other (main) branches of philosophy, like metaphysics, epistemology, logic, etc.
In addition to the points regarding the debate around the existence of African philosophy, the desire to give up the debate on whether African philosophy exists or not is based on the point that, philosophy is essentially a reflective activity. To philosophize is to reflect on human experience in search of answers to some fundamental questions.
The fundamental questions of philosophy everywhere are questions that have to do with the origin, essence, knowability, etc. of the world or the origin, essence, destiny, etc. of human beings. Human beings reflect on these questions in order to find explanations and answers to the questions – questions like what is the reality. How did it come into being? Do we have a destiny and if so what is it? Hence the reflective activity is concerned with such questions that do not have easy answers.
Obviously in all parts of the world, in one form or another, human beings reflect on those and other fundamental questions. Naturally human beings have a curiosity to know. It is a combination of two factors that becomes a motive force for reflection. While the natural curiosity to know is one, the desire to use knowledge to understand and solve human problems is another. As mentioned above, the essence of philosophy is reflection. Wherever there is reflection on fundamental questions, be it about man and his place in nature or nature itself, there is philosophy. That could be one of the justifications for the existence of African philosophy.
There is a tendency, in contemporary African philosophy to understand it as a critical moral practice (cf.Teodros Kiros). This is necessitated by the African situation. Africa faces grave problems owing to its current situation in the world, which is a result of many determinations like, slavery, colonialism, neocolonialism and many other factors. Africa also faces grave problems as a result of its corrupt and inefficient ruling elite, which has allied itself with the forces of exploitation and has largely no motive than enriching itself in cooperation with the forces of globalization/exploitation. Internally Africa faces corruption, the denial of human rights, and the absence of democracy and as a result an abject poverty. African philosophy cannot be silent in the face of these problems, which are a big threat to Africa. Hence it is imperative that it engages as a critical moral practice.
It is the fact of being concerned with these issues that makes it African philosophy. It is the arrogant fashion in which the Occidental tradition of philosophy looks at other systems of thought, philosophies, cultures and identities that is one of the reasons for the emergence of African philosophy. The Occidental tradition of philosophy is largely Eurocentric. Eurocentrism assumes that genuine philosophy and culture are only that of Western philosophy and culture. By doing this Eurocentrism wants that all forms of philosophies and identities be subsumed under the European concepts as models.
In so doing Eurocentrism denies the others the right to speak for themselves. It is in this light that African philosophy focuses on two essential points. On the one hand it has to criticize this attitude of the Europeans. Here it has to play a deconstructive role with the view of fighting Western biases and prejudices. But this is not its only task. It has to also use all the available knowledge, indigenous and otherwise to come up with something that tries to understand Africa and its problems and be part of the search for solutions. Hence in the critical and moral practice the critique of Eurocentrism and reflections on extraversion constitute some of the important things that contemporary African philosophy has to undertake.
Conceptual decolonization is one of the important foci of African philosophy. Colonialism did not end with political independence. This is expressed in the languages that we use, the educational systems and curricula that we follow, the development models that we emulate, the values that we are supposed to develop and cherish and many others. The educational system is extraverted and prepares the young generation only to echo what the Western universities and scholars have established. It robs everybody of the confidence that one is supposed to have to develop and change. It portrays that which is local and indigenous as backward and useless and works to systematically undermine it. African philosophy wants to question these and work for a situation where all philosophies and cultures will be recognized to have some use and can contribute to change. Hence conceptual decolonization provides African philosophy with the instruments with which it could fight this domination by the Western concepts, mode of analysis, language, etc.
It is not a total rejection of Western philosophy, culture, science and technology since these are the achievements of humanity at large and useful for all of us. It is the prejudices and biases in them that need to be rejected. It has to be clear that the values and achievements of the West alone are not worthy of study and attention. The values of others which are outside of the Western paradigm and their contribution for their respective societies and humanity at large must be recognized and they should be given a chance to do so. That is one of the purposes of conceptual decolonization.
The tasks of African philosophy are similar to the tasks that any philosophy has. But if African philosophy is just like any other philosophy and if its tasks are not different from that of European philosophy why do we need the prefix African?
African philosophy is part and parcel of the philosophy of human kind. African philosophy tries to answer the basic philosophical questions that any philosophy tries to answer. The basic questions with which African philosophy is concerned, the methods that it uses and other factors suggest that it is part of the philosophy of human kind.
But nevertheless, this is not the only issue. If this were the case it is not necessary to label it, African. The particular situation of Africa necessitates an appropriate philosophical approach. The place that Africa had during the colonial period and its position at present are clear. As a result Africa’s interests, cultures, philosophies, history, experiences and achievements are neglected. Overcoming such a situation is a daunting task. African philosophy can play a role in overcoming this. Overcoming this requires knowing oneself both as individuals and community. Overcoming this may not be possible without enlightenment and a proper knowledge of one’s identity. One of the tasks of African philosophy is taking stock of the African self (soul). European thinkers like Hume, Kant, Hegel, Marx and others had a certain conception of Africa. Kant and Hegel for instance thought and taught that Africa is outside of history. The thinkers of the enlightenment had, in other words, a Eurocentric understanding of the philosophy of history, history, philosophy, culture and so on. This understanding assumed that only their view of things constituted the universal. Taking only the European as the universal and model for humanity relegated the others (Africans) to second class.
It is through such an approach that important things have been denied to Africa. Overcoming this requires deconstruction and decolonizing the mind. Deconstruction is a way of analysing and understanding texts and it has an eventual purpose of revision. Deconstruction attempts to discover and understand the contradictions in texts. It tries to discover the hidden and paradoxical expressions in texts. The deconstructive aspect of African philosophy tries to lay bare the contradictions in the Eurocentric discourse in general and about Africa in particular. Deconstruction is here taken as a textual criticism, which involves discovering, recognizing and understanding the underlying - and unspoken and implicit assumptions, ideas and frameworks that form the basis for thought and belief. It can be used to sort out the Western tradition by highlighting and discrediting unjustified privileges accorded to hegemonists. It is a way of uncovering the questions behind the answers of a text or tradition.
In talking of deconstruction it is important to remember the way in which postcolonial African philosophy came into being. As mentioned earlier on, it was concerned with demonstrating the existence of African philosophy. African philosophers used Eurocentric criteria and paradigms to show the existence of African philosophy. African philosophers made pleas to European philosophers for recognition and justification. The paradoxical nature of this undertaking was that African philosophers sought recognition from the very European philosophers who believed that genuine philosophy is only European philosophy. The assumption that European philosophy alone is genuine philosophy is not justifiable and acceptable. It is not justifiable to give such a privileged position to a philosophy that emanates from a particular culture and rooted in specific experiences. African philosophy criticizes this assumption on the basis that genuine philosophy cannot be the exclusive possession of one nation or race or culture.
Among other things philosophy is the search for truth. The search for truth cannot be limited to one geographic region, one or two languages or one method. The search for truth is based on the available experiences, cultures, accumulated knowledge, etc. No philosopher, no philosophical system, no one method of philosophy has the exclusive right to search for truth. The assumption that genuine philosophy is only European philosophy is against this basic knowledge.
Philosophy is rooted in a given culture and experiences. The cultures and experiences of human kind are diverse. These phenomena lead to different understandings of truth. Hence one aspect of African philosophy as deconstruction is to challenge this assumption that European philosophy alone is the philosophy for human kind. The challenge to European philosophy constitutes the deconstructive aspect of African philosophy.
Basically deconstruction is a European project. Deconstruction began as a project that challenges European philosophy from within by pointing out its weaknesses and contradictions. African philosophy uses this European project to challenge Europe and establish itself as one, legitimate philosophy of mankind that could be useful not only for Africa but also for human kind in general. It is particularly important to fight against the exclusion of Africa from the important avenues and philosophy is one of them.
A number of important research findings have shown the influence of ancient Egyptian civilization and philosophy upon ancient Greek civilization and philosophy. But the thinkers of modernity denied this. This denial, which is not justifiable, has to be deconstructed. African philosophy as deconstruction here not only tries to find out the truth but also plays an important role of liberating the Europeans from falsehood. The way this liberation could take place is by inviting European philosophy to a dialogue, to recognizing others instead of simply claiming to be the only genuine philosophy.
In these attempts African philosophy functions within the parameters of philosophy and also uses the instruments of philosophy. In that sense it is philosophy like any other philosophy. But at the same time it is not just philosophy but African philosophy, meaning its socio-cultural roots are African, whereby we can say that it functions “on the basis of the structure of difference.”
Here if we take the national-ideological philosophy, which is one of the trends in African philosophy, its point of departure is the conviction that the means and methods of European political philosophy are not sufficient to solve Africa’s problems. Hence it attempts to use new ways of handling political questions/issues. National-ideological philosophy starts with the assumption that it understands Africa better and has better ideas of handling Africa’s problems. I think that it is possible to understand the attempts of Nkrumah, Cabral, Fanon, Senghor, Nyerere, and others in this sense. But the attempt to use philosophy’s methods to understand Africa and act accordingly has both deconstructive and reconstructive dimensions. National-ideological philosophy proposes new ways on the basis of the African experience, world-views, values and knowledge. On the one hand National-ideological philosophy challenges European philosophy rejecting its privileged position to speak for humanity. This is deconstructive. On the other hand, on the basis of indigenous knowledge and values it shows new ways of handling political issues. This is reconstructive. This could be useful both from the perspective of its utility and the moral and psychological benefit it could have for Africans.
African philosophy as a deconstructive undertaking criticizes Eurocentrism. This is done to show its one-sidedness and to reject its denial of the veritability of other cultures, world-views, values and so on. Eurocentrism is actually a mask behind whose veil Europe’s unjustifiable positions were justified. The two important pillars of Eurocentrism, western philosophy and the Christian religion were used to justify colonialism. In addition to its scientific and technological superiority, Europe was able to dominate the world as a result of its Eurocentric discourse, which was used to veil the reality. Eurocentrism was able to spread throughout the world through education and other means. Its deceptive impact is both to the Africans and the Europeans as well. Deconstruction plays an important role in removing this veil. Today European philosophy, European models of development, education and the like dominate the world. Dependence on one model has neglected the non-Europeans. Through this it denied the others a voice in their own affairs and the ability to contribute. Both from the perspective of theory and practice this is dangerous and unacceptable. It is not right to deny the others the right to speak for themselves and contribute to the well being of humanity. The act by which European philosophy preserves a privileged position for itself is the act by it dominates the others. It is such a claim that needs to be deconstructed. The denial of the veritability of the philosophy, culture and values of others has no rational basis. That is why it needs to be deconstructed.
Eurocentrism dominates the world in many respects i. e. education, the media, culture, etc. Orienting everything Eurocentrically is not right and helpful. A right approach would be an intercultural approach that would try to bring all into a fruitful dialogue. The intercultural approach recognizes all philosophies and cultures that have something to say and through that tries to establish a concert of the philosophies and cultures of all. This creates the proper mechanism for the evolution of the universal in the proper sense of the term. This is appropriate for a world that has become largely interdependent.