Sagacity in African Philosophy

Acknowledgements

This book owes its existence to several institutions and many people. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to all of them. With respect to institutions, I am particularly indebted to three institutions that have supported me in one way or the other in my academic sojourn. These are; the University of Nairobi (UoN) where I spent 15 years of my formative years as a lecturer and researcher, the National University of Lesotho (NUL) where I spent three year at the turn of the century as a scholar and philosophy instructor, and more specially to The University of the West Indies (UWI) which enabled me ground myself as Professor of African philosophic sagacity. Besides the conducive academic ecosystem at the UWI, the institution periodically availed funds that enabled me travel to Kenya during summer vacations to undertake field research. Without that support the research aspect of this book would have suffered.

I also wish to extend my candid appreciation to the three reviewers who read through my book proposal. Their criticisms were constructive and their comments valuable. They definitely influenced the book’s trajectory. I also wish to say a big ‘thank you’ to several other scholars who read and commented on the manuscript, especially Professor Francis C. L. Rakotsoane of the University of Eswatini and Professor Samuel O. Imbo of Hamline University. Their insights were most invaluable. Special recognition goes to Henry Odera Oruka. He not only introduced me to the general discipline of philosophy but also, more magnanimously to African philosophy. What’s more, he was the scholar who paved the way in the field of African philosophic sagacity. This groundbreaking work of his is the pedestal upon which the thesis and exploration of this book are grounded. I am also indebted to Professor D. A. Masolo for his guidance, support, and camaraderie in my scholastic journey.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my family for their unwavering support throughout this academic exploration. My spouse, Beatrice, endured late nights with a smile as I burned the midnight oil. My children were patient with me and accorded me much love and kindness during the long hours I spent immersed in academic pursuits. I definitely owe my family one. I cannot forget my colleagues at the UWI. Their intellectual camaraderie was a constant source of inspiration. To the many others whom I have not mentioned, I extend my love and thanks.

Asanteni sana, ero kamano uru, matondo mingi.

Introduction

The subject matter of this text points to the concept of African philosophic sagacity. This was a concept introduced in academic philosophical discussions in the late 1970s by Kenyan philosopher, Henry Odera Oruka. In a general sense African philosophic sagacity consists of basic principles and tenets that underlie and justify various African beliefs, customs and practices. In other words, it constitutes the basis and reflection of African culture. African culture has been misunderstood or purposely downgraded by educational and media institutions in Western societies. Unfortunately, even after attainment of political independence, this misunderstanding or downgrading continued. One would have expected that with attainment of independence African countries would have made concerted efforts to correct the picture. Within the Academy, African philosophic sagacity is an effort in that direction. It highlights the importance of Indigenous wisdom systems and the role of critical thinking within African traditions.

Running through most of the chapters in the book is the evident communal spirit in traditional African societies; a spirit which according to Wiredu should not be discarded in modern Africa. He argues that the communal spirit and fellowship found in traditional societies infuses the social life of Africans with a pervasive humanity and fullness of life that visitors to Africa have always easily noticed. This is a quality of African culture which, according to him, should not only be preserved but positively developed and deepened (Wiredu 1980, 21). However, it should be noted that by traditional society it is meant a society that has existed for a considerable period of time with minimal changes; a society where the role of custom and habit is predominant. Its people are directed by collective memories sanctioned by social norms to ensure continuity of its practices and way of life. This feature is more evident and clearly practiced among the majority of rural rather than urban populations of the African continent.

In my African philosophy classes, I used to explain the communal spirit in traditional African societies rather humorously by using the acronym of my university. The acronym of The University of the West Indies is UWI which some would phonate as ‘you-we’. I would tell the students that the ‘you-we’ was actually a reflection of communalism and rephrasing Mbiti’s dictum of ‘I am because we are; and since we are, therefore I am’ (Mbiti 1989, 106), I would say, ‘you are because we are; and since we are, therefore you are’. With a light touch, I would then tease the students that they belonged to an environment grounded upon and fortified by the communal spirit and that I expected them to behave accordingly. I would go on to inform them that what the ‘you-we’ meant was that our university recognised that the learning process was a collaborative effort; that the most effective learning happens when all work together sharing ideas rather than learning in isolation; that no one has monopoly of knowledge and therefore we should learn from each other. What’s more, that our university respected the dialogical nature of education and christened it enthymematical as ‘you-we’. The main reason why I explained the communal spirit in terms of ‘you-we’ was for the simple purpose of comprehension and underscore the importance of interconnectedness and shared humanity; that an individual’s well-being is intrinsically linked to those of others. No one is an island unto oneself.

This text consists of selected essays written over the years within the broad discipline of African philosophy with specific focus on philosophic sagacity. Most of the essays are already published as journal articles or book chapters. However the essays have been revised. The advantage of such a collection of essays originally written at different points in time and published variously is that it enables the reader to peruse through the various essays within a single volume saving him or her time of having to look at different spaces. A collection offers the reader a chance to understand and interact with a range of discussions and viewpoints that reveals the depths of a single theme. It also allows the reader to be able to clearly see and follow the development of the author’s thought process and the connectedness of his thoughts. In this regard, I wish to register my sincere gratitude to the publishers, journals and authors for granting me permission to use some of my ideas in earlier publications.

The text comprises of three parts. Part I involves five chapters that variously delve into the thesis of philosophic sagacity. This is a concept that was introduced into academic philosophical discussions by Kenyan philosopher, H. Odera Oruka, in the late 70s and has since become an important approach to African philosophy. The first chapter basically lays the groundwork for understanding the discourse on the nature and trends in African philosophy. The chapter outlines and discusses Western rhetoric on Africa as grounded in the views of some renowned European scholars namely Kant, Hegel, and Lévy-Bruhl. Using Césaire’s terminology, it is apparent that the rhetoric as represented by the three scholars was an exercise in ‘thingifying’ Africans. The rhetoric was not simply an effort in othering Africans but a commitment to ‘thingification’ of Africans. Chapter 2 is an African response to the Western rhetoric. There are those who believe that the rhetoric was misguided in that it never took into account the role Africa played in world history, civilisation, and philosophy. They see proponents of the rhetoric as having presented a short-sighted story to suit their interests. In their story, they have ignored facts or, better yet, twisted facts to fulfil their agenda of European colonialism and hegemony; that they twisted history to justify European sovereignty and supremacy. Their story was a twisted story, a twistory, which is the abandoning of objectivity and twisting of history (facts). The chapter also presents five approaches to African philosophy that serve very well as rejoinders to the rhetoric.

Chapter 3 is a biographical account of Henry Odera Oruka. The chapter outlines Odera Oruka’s journey from elementary, secondary, and post-secondary (tertiary) education leading to his studies in Philosophy. Interestingly, Odera Oruka joined Uppsala University as a Science student but out of his own initiative and interest, he added Philosophy and graduated as a double major. For his graduate studies, he abandoned Science and proceeded with Philosophy. The chapter goes on to highlight his role in the formulation of philosophic sagacity as a trend or approach in African philosophy. The chapter also discusses his view on the nature of philosophical dialogue and, more importantly, how the characteristics of philosophical dialogue influenced him in his academic journey. The chapter is aptly titled ‘An African Savant: Henry Odera Oruka’. Chapter 4 homes in on the rationale of philosophic sagacity as an approach to African philosophy. Philosophic sagacity, the argument proceeds, serves to fulfil the deficiencies of the other approaches notably ethnophilosophy and professional philosophy. Technically speaking, philosophic sagacity merges the strongpoints of the other (two) approaches and ignores their weaknesses. According to Odera Oruka, philosophic sagacity traces African philosophy by wearing the uniforms of anthropological fieldwork and using dialogical techniques to pass through anthropological fogs to the philosophical ground (Odera Oruka 1991d, 3). The ethnophilosophical approach functions within the anthropological field separated from philosophical ground whereas the professional philosophy approach operates within philosophical ground disconnected from the anthropological field.

It is presumptuous to conceive philosophic sagacity as univocal. Chapter 5 further enunciates philosophic sagacity. It examines Odera Oruka’s works on philosophic sagacity, identifies three of its functions and aims namely the academic, the cultural-nationalist, and the epistemic. This implies that philosophic sagacity far from being univocal has a tripartite classification: that there are three trends in philosophic sagacity. Contrary to the general belief and practice that philosophic sagacity’s role and function is unitary, the chapter elucidates the multifaceted role and significance of philosophic sagacity.

Part II of the collection consists of chapters depicting the empirical and pragmatic use of philosophic sagacity. In other words, formalisation and exhibition of the relevance of philosophic sagacity at the practical level is the concern of the chapters in Part II. As expected the topics dealt with in Part II locate within the socio-political domain. Chapter 6 explores the relevance of African philosophic sagacity in the area of formal education in Africa specifically the discipline of African philosophy of education. The starting point of the chapter is the assertion that the importance of studying any disciple is for it to assist in resolving societal problems and improve the living conditions. In the chapter, it is argued that the enhancement of the relevance of studying the discipline of African philosophy of education takes place with the inclusion of philosophic sagacity to it, which is to say, engaging teachers who besides being experts in education are sagaciously philosophic. Chapter 7 addresses the question of climate change and the need to adjust the manner in which the problem is confronted. The confrontation of the problem using the Western model has not been successful. In the chapter, the argument advanced is that the communal humanistic spirit dominant in African cultures, which is an integral part of African philosophic sagacity, should find space in articulation of climate ethics as part of climate change resolution. In current climate ethics discourse, the philosophical side of sagacity finds adequate expression but the sagacious side neglected. There is need for inclusion of the sagacious dimension.

The subject matter of Chapter 8 is the social institution of lako (wife guardianship). The chapter discusses the general perception of that social institution and argues that the English translation of the term lako as widow inheritance or wife inheritance is misguided, that translation is in reality a colonial nickname of the social institution that is part of the Western rhetoric on Africa to thingify Africans. The chapter then discusses some of the contemporary challenges facing the institution of lako. At the end of the discussion, the conclusion arrived at is that some of the criticisms levelled against the social institution is because of misconception where the institution is confused or equated with wife inheritance or widow inheritance. Chapter 9 is a discourse on the communal spirit in traditional African societies, a spirit reflected in their traditional institutions, structures, beliefs, and behaviour. The chapter has two parts. The first part outlines the spirit of communalism as reflected in African ontology, ethics, and the institution of marriage. The spirit is also demonstrated in the notions of greeting as well as the activity of eating which are viewed fundamentally as exercises in socialisation process. The second part further cements the spirit of communalism among the Luo people of Kenya in the way in which their naming system works. The part outlines three naming categories among Joluo, specifically names given in infancy, ancestral names or names from dreams, and names depicting kinship/homeland. At the same time efforts are channelled towards showing the communal spirit in each of the categories.

Part III of the text consists of two interviews with the author. The first interview, Chapter 10, was conducted by Dr Azuka Nzegwu on issues revolving round African philosophy; its definition and challenges as well as its relevance. The interview also covers the role of philosophy in national and social issues. The initial part of the interview is a biographical note of the interviewee; of his journey from primary, secondary, and high school through to university and how he ended up majoring in philosophy. Chapter 11 is an interview conducted by Dr Marcos Carvalho Lopes, a Brazilian philosopher. The interview begins with the interviewee addressing the question of definition of African philosophy and how he came in contact with African philosophy. He then speaks to the development of African philosophy as a search for identity. He also addresses pertinent questions that confront African philosophy today. The interviewee also responds to the question of womanism and feminism in Africa and interrogates the concern of inconspicuousness of African philosophy in Brazil despite the fact that Brazil is the country with the largest black population outside Africa.