Content area
Full Text
As an enterprise centred in human experiences, philosophy must acknowledge its history and find its way from that history to define the future of humanity. Inter-philosophical dialogue is an attempt to metaphorically dialogue with that history with a view to creating better understanding across cultures. In this essay, I seek to examine the nature and foundations of inter-philosophical dialogue from an African standpoint. Not only is dialogue the defining element of philosophy, but it is also integral to what it means to be human. I am convinced that inter-philosophical dialogue is critical to the future wellbeing of the world and that of humanity in particular. However, in celebrating its promise, we should not be oblivious to the fact that, being a talismanic concept, dialogue can be manipulated to mask and smooth over the hegemony that still defines the world. The world continues to face the dangers of an ethnocentric rationalism which seeks to measure the legitimacy all other traditions of life and thought in terms of standards set by one dominant tradition.
Introduction
Reason does not become something different because it is exercised in the tropics. Reason is supreme and does not bow to geography. But precisely because reason is not blind, it has, in order to keep an accurate and firm grip on things, to apprehend different realities differently (Ki-zerbo 1981: p. 4).
The submission above, which constitutes my point of departure, is the foundation upon which this discussion on inter-philosophical dialogue is premised. Not only does Ki-zerbo reassert the universality of reason, but he also affirms a very important point-that it is not within the nature of reason to be blind to context. The history of philosophy, particularly in Africa, has had to deal with the problem of a specific form of reason that refused to apply itself seriously to the virtues of understanding different realities differently. The paradox, however, is that, despite reason being supreme, attempts have been made by some to claim sole entitlement to the so-called right to reason and to make reason submit to their whims and ideologies. But by trying to subordinate reason to their whims and ideologies such individuals were invariably rendering themselves unreasonable. A perfect example of such unreasonableness was the myth of races...