1

PHILOSOPHY COMPREHENSIVE FOR TYROS

2

PREFACE

Many students of philosophy begin their studies from a predominantly literary background, having

no knowledge about the literary style of philosophy. Many find the subject at the initial stages very

boring and difficult to understand due to the complexity of the language and terms used.

Undoubtedly, philosophy is a very broad discipline and very difficult for one to conclusively

exhaust all of its themes. It is the desire to find a solution to this problem that made me to compile

this book.

This book is intended to give the reader a bird’s eye view of philosophy. The main aim of the

author is to present philosophy in a very simple and clear language. It gives students of philosophy

a quick access to the main topical issues in the various courses of philosophy and also for all people

who wish to broaden their knowledge base in philosophy. The piece consist of the lecture notes of

the various professors of philosophy in St. Paul’s Catholic Seminary, Sowutuom, over the years.

The topics treated in this volume are: History of Ancient Philosophy, History of Medieval

Philosophy, History of Modern Philosophy, History of Contemporary Philosophy, Introduction to

Philosophy, Problems of Philosophy, Introduction to Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Introduction to

Logic, Informal Logic, Symbolic Logic, Political Philosophy, Phenomenology of Religion,

Cosmology, Metaphysics, Epistemology, Philosophy of Religion, and African Philosophical

Thoughts.

Since philosophy is a broad discipline, the book makes no claim of exhausting all the various

themes in philosophy. It also makes no attempt to treat exhaustively all the topics it has raised. It

only seeks to give a simple and brief exposition on the major themes in philosophy. This book

seeks to give the student of philosophy a chance to have a quick over view of some philosophical

issues.

I express my largess of heart to Very Rev. Frs. Francis Arthur, Francis LeMaire, Joseph Okine-

Quartey, John Asare, and Paul Agbodza, and Dr. Louis Atsiatorme, without whose contribution

this work would not have been possible. My deepest appreciation also goes to my students in St.

Paul’s Catholic Seminary who helped me in compiling this volume. May God bless you all.

Accra, John Doe Dormah.

January, 2019

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. History of Ancient philosophy 8

x 1.0 Introduction x 1.1 Division x 1.2. Milesian Philosophers x 1.3. Greek Atomism x 1.4. The Sophist x 1.5. Socrates x 1.6. Plato x 1.7. Aristotle x 1.8. The Hellenistic World x 1.9 Cynicism x 1.10. Epicureanism x 1.12. Stoicism

2. History of Medieval Philosophy 11

x 2.0. Introduction x 2.1. Faith and Reason x 2.2. Creation and Eternity x 2.3. St. Augustine x 2.4. St. Anselm x 2.5. St. Thomas Aquinas x 2.6. Problem of Evil x 2.7 Doctrine of Interiority x 2.8. Free Will and God's Foreknowledge

3. History of Modern Philosophy 15

x 3.0. Introduction x 3.1. Rationalism x 3.2. Empiricism x 3.3. Kantian Philosophy x 3.4. Thomas Hobbes x 3.5. Jean Jacques Rousseau x 3.6. Idealism x 3.7. Materialism

4. History of Contemporary Philosophy 18

x 4.0. Introduction x 4.1. Pragmatism x 4.2. Charles Sanders Peirce

4

x 4.3. William James x 4.4. John Dewey x 4.5. Analytical Philosophy x 4.6. Logical Atomism x 4.7. Logical Positivism

x 4.8. Wittgenstein x 4.9. Rudolph Carnap x 4.10. Existentialism x 4.12. Blaise Pascal x 4.13. Jean-Paul Sartre x 4.14. Friedrich Nietzsche

5. Introduction to Philosophy 22

x 5.0. Introduction

x 5.1. The Whatness of Philosophy?

x 5.2. Disciplines in Philosophy

x 5.3. Methods Used in Philosophy

x 5.4. The Value of Philosophy

6. Introduction to Philosophy 24

x 6.0. Introduction x 6.1. The Principles of Reason x 6.2. Philosophy and Seminary Formation x 6.3. Philosophical Ethics x 6.4. Ethical Theories x 6.5. Ethical Principles

7. Problems of Philosophy 27

x 7.0. Introduction x 7.1. Existentialism x 7.2. Martin Heidegger x 7.3. Mind-Body Problem x 7.4. Idealism x 7.5. Rights of Animals

8. Introduction to Ethics 29

x 8.0. Introduction x 8.1. Types of Ethics

5

x 8.2. Moral and Natural Goods x 8.3. Instrumental and Intrinsic Goods x 8.4. Realism and Constructivism x 8.5. Plato x 8.6. Aristotle x 8.7. Hedonism x 8.8. Cynicism x 8.9. Stoicism x 8.10. Christian/ Medieval Ethics x 8.11. Modern Ethics x 8.12. Rationalism x 8.13. Utilitarianism

9. Philosophical Ethics 35

x 9.0. Introduction x 9.1. Psychological Egoism x 9.2. Determinism x 9.3. Ethical Relativism x 9.4. What Makes an Act Right x 9.5. Theological Ethics/ Consequentialism x 9.6. Deontological Ethics x 9.7. Applied Ethics x 9.8. Abortion x 9.9. Euthanasia

10. Introduction to Logic 37

x 10.0. Introduction x 10.1. What Is An Argument? x 10.2. Types of Augments x 10.3. Deductive Argument x 10.4. Inductive Argument x 10.5. Language x 10.6. Agreement and Disagreement x 10.7. Fallacies x 10.8. The Relevance of Logic In The Formation Of Seminarians

11. Informal Logic 41

x 11.0. Introduction x 11.1. Argument By Analogy x 11.2. Mill’s Method x 11.3. The Value of Science

12. Symbolic Logic 43

6

x 12.0. Introduction x 12.1. Truth Function x 12.2. Truth Table x 12.3. Argument Forms and Fallacies

13. Political Philosophy 45

x 13.0. Introduction x 13.1. Plato’s Politics x 13.2. Aristotle’s Politics x 13.3. Medieval Era x 13.4. St. Augustine x 13.5. St. Thomas Aquinas x 13.6. Modern Era x 13.7. Niccolo Machiavelli x 13.8. Thomas Hobbes x 13.9. Power, Authority, and Legitimacy x 13.10. Constitution

14. Phenomenology of Religion 48

x 14.0. Introduction x 14.1. Religion x 14.2. The Concept of God and His Existence x 14.3. Anselm’s Ontological Argument x 14.4. St. Thomas Aquinas Five Proofs x 14.5. Theodicy x 14.6. Life After Death

15. Cosmology 51

x 15.0. Introduction x 15.1. Origin of Cosmology x 15.2. Types of Cosmology x 15.3. Physical Cosmology x 15.4. Religious Cosmology x 15.5. Esoteric Cosmology x 15.6. Metaphysical Cosmology x 15.7. Aims of Cosmology x 15.8. Problems of Cosmology x 15.9. Whence the Universe x 15.10. The Constituent Cause of the Universe x 15.11. The Final Cause of the Material Universe

16. Metaphysics 55

x 16.0. Introduction x 16.1. Definition of Metaphysics

7

x 16.2. Etymological Approach x 16.3. Big Picture Approach x 16.4. Constructive Approach x 16.5. Definition by Example x 16.6. Traditional Definition x 16.7. Conclusion

17. Epistemology 58

x 17.0. Introduction x 17.1. History of Epistemology x 17.2. Types of Knowledge x 17.3. Tripartite Theory x 17.4. Gettier Problem x 17.5. Theories of Truth x 17.6. Sources of Knowledge x 17.7. Theories of Knowledge x 17.8. Spinoza x 17.9. John Locke x 17.10. Leibniz

18. Philosophy of Religion 61

x 18.0. Introduction x 18.1. Aim of the Course x 18.2. Faith and Reason x 18.3. Hegel x 18.4. Feuerbach x 18.5. Karl Marx

19. African Philosophical Thoughts 63

x 19.0. Introduction x 19.1. What is an African? x 19.2. Who is an African? x 19.3. African Metaphysical Thoughts x 19.4. African Epistemological Thought x 19.5. African Axiological Thought x 19.6. Conclusion

8

HISTORY OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY

1.0. INTRODUCTION

This course explores the thinkers and doctrines of classical Greek and Roman philosophy from its

emergence in the 8th century B.C. to its early contacts with Christianity. History of ancient

philosophy is defined as the stories of the lives and opinions of the great men of the western world

in the ancient era. To understand why and how philosophy came into existence in a cultural world

dominated by poetic mythology and the codified legal norms, it will be necessary to take into

account the geographical, literary, social, political, religious, and scientific contexts of the ancient

world. Eventually serious inquiry into human and divine realities formed the self-consciously

distinct enterprise known as “φιλοσοφία – philosophia,” or love of wisdom.

1.1. DIVISION

Ancient philosophy is traditionally divided into pre-Socratic and post-Socratic periods. The pre –

Socratic period include philosophers like Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Anaxagoras,

Parmenides, Heraclitus, among others. Renown of the post-Socratic periods includes Plato and

Aristotle and the Hellenistic and Roman philosophy.

1.2. MILESIAN PHILOSOPHERS

The first group of Greek philosophers is three of Milesian thinkers: Thales, Anaximander, and

Anaximenes. Their main concern was to come up with a cosmological theory purely based on

natural phenomena. Their approach required the rejection of all traditional explanations based on

religious authority, dogma, myth and superstition. They all agreed on the notion that all things

come from a single “primal substance”. Thales believed it was water, Anaximander said it was a

substance different from all other known substances; “infinite, eternal and ageless”, and

Anaximenes claimed it was air.

Pythagoras is considered as one of the Ionian thinkers but outside the Milesian school: he was

originally from Samos, an offshore Ionian settlement. His approach combines science with

religious beliefs, something that would have caused horror among the Milesian school. His

philosophy has a dose of mysticism, probably an influence of the Orphic tradition. Mathematics,

9

in the sense of demonstrative deductive arguments, begins with Pythagoras. He is credited as the

author of the first known mathematical formulation, the theorem which states that the square of

the longest side of a right triangle equals the sum of the squares of the other two sides. Deductive

reasoning from general premises seems to have been a Pythagorean innovation.

1.3. GREEK ATOMISM

Atomism began with Leucippus and Democritus. They believed that everything is composed of

atoms, which are indestructible and physically indivisible. They were strict determinists, who

believed that everything happens in accordance with natural laws and the universe. They said, “

Everything has no purpose and is nothing more than a mixture of infinite atoms being shuffled and

re-shuffled according to the indifferent rules of nature.”

1.4. THE SOPHIST

The Sophists’ period saw prominent philosophers such as Protagoras, Antiphon of Athens, and

Thrasymachus. The sophists did not represent a school of thought, but rather a movement or a

trend in the intellectual life of the times. In an age which was noted for democratic institutions in

many city-states and for political ambition, the sophist instructed the Athenian youth in politics,

economics, speech making, ethics, poetry, philosophy, law among others. Protagoras advocates

that man is the measure of all things. It is interpreted that each man’s experience is the criterion of

what is true for himself. The emphasis is then on human nature as a criterion for value. Antiphon

denounced all forms of inequalities and advocates that all men are born equal and so he condemned

slavery. Thrasymachus thought that in practice, all real rights are rights of the strong. Right

actions are determined by the strong.

1.5. SOCRATES

Socrates was a foe of the Sophists; the professional teachers who claimed to have all the answers

and who believed that "might make right". The Sophists were teachers of debate and rhetoric who

took money for their teaching and in return gave accepted popular opinions and claimed to have

all knowledge. Socrates believed that one should not accept someone's opinions but put everything

to the test of critical reasoning. Socrates left no writings of his own, but his best known disciple,

Plato, wrote at least 24Dialogues giving accounts of the discussions his mentor held in Athens but

also incorporating his own beliefs. Through Plato, Socrates influenced Aristotle and subsequent

10

philosophers. It is difficult to make a clear distinction between the teachings of Socrates and Plato

because Plato at times may have included his own conclusions in his Dialogues as a tribute to his

teacher who had so inspired him. To question everything, to avoid sophistry and to seek justice

and the good life was employed in his quest for wisdom.

1.6. PLATO

Plato and Aristotle are the two most important Greek philosophers. Their work has been the main

focus of interest for students of philosophy. Plato had many philosophical interests including ethics

and politics but he is best known for his metaphysical and epistemological ideas. One of his most

influential insights is the Theory of Ideas. For Plato, notions like virtue, justice, beauty, goodness,

etc., would not be possible unless we had some direct knowledge of these things in an earlier

existence. We are born into this world with an imperfect memory of these Forms. In that ideal

world of Ideas, one can experience the real Forms which are perfect and universal. Our world is

an imperfect parody of the Platonic flawless and superior world of Ideas. Knowledge of these

Forms is possible only through long and arduous study by philosophers but their eventual

enlightenment will qualify them, and they alone, to rule society.

1.7. ARISTOTLE

Aristotle’s interests covered a wide scope: ethics, metaphysics, physics, biology, mathematics,

meteorology, astronomy, psychology, politics and rhetoric, among other topics. Aristotle was the

first thinker who systematically developed the study of logic.

1.8. THE HELLENISTIC WORLD

During the Hellenistic age, four philosophical schools flourished: the Cynics, Sceptics, Epicureans

and Stoics. During this time, political power was in the hands of the Macedonians. Therefore,

Greek philosophers abandoned their political concerns and focused on problems of the individual.

Instead of trying to come up with plans to improve society, their interest was how to be happy or

virtuous.

1.9. CYNICISM

Cynicism is derived from the Greek word ‘kunos’ which means dog-like ones’ is believed to have

originated from the way of life of its founder Diogenes of Sinope is said to have lived in a dog’s

11

hut. They believed that pleasure could not be attained in temporal material things. For them fruits

of civilization such as marriage, property, religion are all worthless. They believed that the world

is fundamental evil and if we trust our happiness in them, we found ourselves betrayed. If a person

is to find salvation in the world he/she must find it within himself/herself and this is what virtue

consists in. the essence of virtue, they said is self-control and is teachable.

1.10. SCEPTICISM

The Sceptic philosophical school systematized old doubts: the senses caused troubles to most

philosophers except some rare exceptions like Plato who simply denied the cognitive value of

perception in favour of his world of ideas. On top of the scepticism of the senses, the Sceptics

added moral and logical scepticism.

1.11. EPICUREANISM

Epicureanism claimed that life was about pursuing this world's pleasures. They only believed in

the material world, a belief which attracted the opposition of the Stoics.

1.12. STOICISM

The Stoics said that everything that happens is due to divine providence, therefore, whatever

misfortune occurs; a stoic will accept it without complaint. Stoics rejected Aristotle’s views on the

relevance of bodily and material goods to human happiness. Achieving happiness, stoics said, is

not important, what is actually important is to pursue happiness since the outcome of our attempt

is not fully under our control.

2. HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY

2.0. INTRODUCTION

History of Medieval Philosophy refers to the stories of the lives and philosophical opinions of the

great men of the medieval era. History of Medieval philosophy started around the fifth century,

where the church men like St. Augustine and St. Gregory of Nyssa who belonged to the Roman

Empire had great influenced on the Christian thinkers like St. Anselm and St. Bonaventure of the

middle age. There are three phases or periods of history of medieval philosophy. The first period

is called the patristic period where philosophers like St. Augustine, Boethius and the works of St.

12

Anselm had great influence on the middle ages. The second period is the period of great synthesis

of the thirteen century. This was the time where the people were doing real philosophy. These

philosophers include St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure and Don Scotus. The third period was

a period of new direction in destructive criticism of Ockham Razor.

In the history of medieval philosophy, we study topics like, faith and reason, God’s existence,

creation and eternity, freewill and foreknowledge of God, problem of evil and the doctrine of

interiority. These topics were championed by St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Soverinus

Boethius, St. Anselm and William of Ockham.

2.1. FAITH AND REASON

For Faith and Reason, St. Anselm who was a moderate fideist, claimed that faith and reason can

be reconciled inasmuch as true knowledge of things is based on faith. Reason does not functions

as the source of true knowledge, it is rather a vehicle for understanding what is already known by

faith. Anselm is claimed to have said that, “For I do not seek to understand in order that I may

believe, but I believe in order to understand” (proslogium, Ch. 1). For Thomas Aquinas who was

a moderate rationalist, he argued that reason and faith are compatible in the sense that truth derived

from reason is compatible with the truth acquired through faith. This is because, what is true can

never be false. Only the false is opposed to truth and that it is impossible that the truth of faith

should be opposed to those principles that human reason knows naturally (summa contra Gentiles).

2.2. CREATION AND ETERNITY

In Creation and eternity, the idea that God created the world is problematic. There were questions

like where was God before he created the world? What was he doing then? When did God create

the world?

2.3. ST. AUGUSTINE

Augustine’s attempt to address the questions made him ask the question; What is time? For

Augustine, time only measures the duration of created things, since God is not part of creation, he

was not in time. He is eternally present. Time started when God created the world. Time will end

after the world is gone. It is only finite beings who go through change and who has past, present

13

and future but God does not change. He is eternal and never in time. Therefore, creation might not

necessary in time (Confessions, Book 11).

2.4. ST. ANSELM

As regaeds God’s existence, Anselm gave us an understanding of what the concept of God entails.

It entails something, that which nothing greater can be thought, or that which nothing can be

greater. And this is what is call God. God’s existence is not a mere conceptual existence (existence

in the mind alone), but an actual existence (real existence), since real existence is greater than a

conceptual one, then God is the greatest being.

2.5. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS

Aquinas gives us five proofs for the existence of God. The first three arguments have the same

argument form. Each claims that only one existing being could be the source of existence in the

world, which we call God. The fourth argument claims that perfection comes in degrees, the

highest of which is God. The fifth argument claims that the whole universe has a great design, and

if there were such a purpose, there be a designer which might call God.

2.6. PROBLEM OF EVIL

Augustine was concerned with the problem of evil. His intention was to prove that it is by our own

free choice that we commit sin (City of God, Book XII). But we do not really desire to sin. If we

know that what we are doing is a sin, then, for Augustine, we would not opt for that since we are

always geared towards the good. So it follows that everything is really good. But how can there be

evil. Evil is not something that exists in itself. Nothing contrary to the good exists. That is, evil is

not created by God. Only good things exist. Augustine made a distinction between two kinds of

evil. One is call natural evil. That is, evil things that cannot be helped such as calamities. Another

kind of evil is called moral evil. Moral evils are those things that we intentionally do to others.

2.7. DOCTRINE OF INTERIORITY

14

In the doctrine of interiority, Augustine, wanted to know about God and the soul. In his work, “De

Ordine”, there are two problems in philosophy, one regards the soul and the other, God. The soul

helps us to know ourselves, that is, who we are, what we are capable of, and God makes us to

know the principle of our being. The ultimate knowledge is about knowing God. The soul makes

us worthy of happiness while God makes us happy. For Augustine, the soul and God cannot be

separated; this is because posing the problem of soul is the same as posing the problem of God.

For him, in order to know God and to know the truth man does not have to leave himself because

the truth is found in the depth of his being. For Augustine, where man is, there is God (ubi homo

ibi Deus), meaning that where man is, there we find God’s presence within man’s spirit. The life

of every man has its beginning in God’s creative act and concludes this temporal course with a

return to God.

2.8. FREEWILL AND GOD’S FOREKNOWLEDGE

For Freewill and God’s Foreknowledge, William of Ockham argued that our ideas of

predestination and reprobation are poorly thought of (predestination, God’s foreknowledge and

future contingent, Q. 1). If God knows who are predestined or reprobated, it does not mean that

we could ever know it. That is, even if our lives are already directed towards some determined end

and is already known to God, but since we don’t have access to this knowledge, then it would not

follow that God determined us. Hence, we are free.

In conclusion, these are the ideas and contributions of medieval philosophers that had great

influence on the middle ages.

Reference

Evans, G. R. (1993). Philosophy and theology in the middle ages. London. Routledge.

Spade, PaulVincent. (2004). Medieval philosophy. http//plato.standard.edu/entries-philosophy.

(accessed 10 September, 2017).

Fr. Hillary Agbenosi, (2015/2016) Academic year. History of Medieval philosophy. Lecture

Notes.

15

3. HISTORY OF MODERN PHILOSOPHY

3.0. INTRODUCTION

The word modern in philosophy originally meant “new,” distinguishing a new historic era both

from antiquity and from the intervening middle ages. It involves life’s stories and opinions of great

philosophers after the Medieval Era between the 15th and 19th Century from the western world.

Factors that caused the rise of modern philosophy include the Renaissance (rebirth of knowledge),

Reformation and the rise of science and mathematical method. Modern Philosophy has two main

traditions, Rationalist and the Empiricist. In this new philosophical view, reason and experience

became the sole standards of truth from which followers developed their philosophical thoughts.

The outline of the course includes philosophical views such as Rationalism, Empiricism, Kantian

Philosophy, Ideas of Thomas Hobbes and J.J Rousseau, Idealism of Hegel and Materialism of Karl

Marx.

3.1. Rationalism.

Rationalism is the characteristic of a philosophical theory that claims that by pure reasoning,

without appeal to any empirical premises, one can arrive at a substantial knowledge about the

nature of the universe. It claims that human reason is the most reliable source of knowledge. A

notable result of the intellectual of labors of Descartes and his continental followers mostly from

Europe, the rationalists, was the revival and further development of ideal of a deductive science

that goes back to Plato and Aristotle. Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Benedict Baruch Spinoza

(1632-1677) and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) are classical contributors to rationalism.

Descartes and Leibniz argued that certain ideas are innate in human mind, that, given the proper

occasion, experience would cause these innate truth to become self-evident. They interpreted the

natural world after the mechanical model of physics and determinism to all physical events.

Descartes saw reality as a dualism made of two basic substances, thought and extension. Spinoza

asserted monism, only a single substance, nature, which has various attributes and modes. Leibniz,

a pluralist, asserted that there are various kinds of monads accounting for the various elements in

nature. (Copleston, 1960).

16

3.2. Empiricism

Empiricism comes from empiria (Gk.) meaning experience. In philosophy, it is a theory that all

knowledge is derived from experience. Empiricism was developed mainly by British philosophers.

These include John Locke (1632-1704), George Berkeley (1685-1783) and David Hume (1711-

1776). Modern Empiricism originated as a reaction against rationalism with the claim that, ideas

are derived from sense-experience. For Locke, the scope of our knowledge is limited to, and, by,

our experience. For Hume, Moral ideas are from inner experience. For Berkeley, to be is to be

perceived, esse est percipi; if something was not perceived it will not exist, and argues that our

knowledge depends on vision and other sensory experiences. (Schacht, 1984).

3.3. Kantian Philosophy

This philosophy was developed by Immanuel Kant (1720-1804) a German philosopher. His

philosophy is sometimes called Critical Philosophy. His goal is to resolve the debate between the

rationalist and the empiricist. He examined the bases of human knowledge and created an

individual epistemology (Critique of Pure Reason, 1787). He differentiated the mode of thinking

into analytic and synthetic proposition. For Kant, all analytic judgments are a priori and synthetic

judgments are also called a posteriori. (Oliver, 1999).

3.4. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

The 17th century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, in his effort to attain unity, asserted that

matter is the only real substance. He constructed a comprehensive system of metaphysics that

provided a solution to the mind-body problem by reducing mind to the internal motions of the

body. He also argued that there is no contradiction between human freedom and causal

determinism; the view that every act is determined by a prior cause. For him, human life in the

state of nature is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. For him, societies are formed by binding

agreement for protection against abuses in the state of nature where their natural rights are

surrendered to the authority of the sovereign with absolute power.

3.5. Jean – Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)

17

He is a French philosopher, social and political theorist. In his concept of the noble savage, he

posited that human are naturally free and good but are corrupted by institution of society-“man is

born free, but he is everywhere in chains” (ibid). Individual in the society must subjugate personal

interest to general will, an abstract expression of the common good.

3.6. Idealism (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1770-1831)

Traditionally, idealism is the claim that all reality is reducible or dependent on some sort of mental

reality (such as mind or spirit).Hegel, a German philosopher in the 19th century, whose system of

absolute idealism is influenced by Kant and Schelling. For Hegel, absolute truth, or reality, exist

and that the human mind can know it; thus whatever is real is rational. And, that which is objective

or subjective is viewed by Hegel as manifestation of Absolute Spirit. He also believed in an

evolution of ideas through dialectic process. William (2007).

3.7. Materialism; Karl Marx (1818-1883)

Karl Marx is a German Political Philosopher influenced by Hegel’s dialectics. The name

frequently given to Marx’s philosophy is historical materialism, which is a philosophy of history

and a theory of economics based on a materialistic conception of reality and causation. It claims

that human beings are rooted in nature; no other causal factors are at work in the world beyond

physical laws and human activity, thus ideas can arise only as a result of material condition (ibid).

It rejects any reference to spiritual reality as well as the views of Plato, Descartes and Hegel.

It is realized that most of the philosophical views pointed out by great philosophers of the modern

era have their basic foundation from the two main traditions of modern philosophy. Namely;

Rationalist and the Empiricist. These traditions gave birth to other philosophical theories in the

modern era. With this course the seminarian is able to identify the thinking pattern of others in his

pastoral mission and provide charitable corrections where necessary.

Reference.

Copleston, F. (1960).History of Philosophy. New York: Image Books.

Lemaire, F. (2016/17). Lecture Note: History of Modern Philosophy. Sowutuom.

18

Schart, R. (1984). Classical Modern Philosophy. London: Routledge.

Oliver, M. (1999). History of Philosophy. New York: Barnes & Noble.

William, F. L. (2007). The Voyage of Discovery: The Historical Introduction to Philosophy.

Belmont: Wardsworth.

4. HISTORY OF CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY

4.0. Introduction

History of contemporary philosophy refers to the stories of the lives of the great men in the

contemporary era. The term generally deals with philosophers from the late nineteenth century

through to the twentieth century. Philosophers of this era consider it as contemporary because,

they regard their philosophical investigation as attempting to transcend the subjectivist thought-

pattern of the Age of Reason and Age of Idealism. Our approach is topical. Thus, Pragmatism,

Analytical Philosophy, and Existentialism. Under each topic at least a philosopher (of that

persuasion) is studied.

4.1. PRAGMATISM

Etymologically, the term pragmatism comes from the Greek word ‘pragma’ which means “action/

affair”. It argues that the meaning of any concept can be equated with the conceivable operational

or practical consequences of whatever the concept portrays. It was put forward by Charles Sanders

Peirce (1839-1914); It was given wide and popular circulation through William James (1842-1910)

and John Dewey (1857-1952). Each of these philosophers expressed a different aspect of

pragmatism. Peirce was initially interested in logic and science, James wrote about psychology

and religion, and Dewey was absorbed with the problems of ethics and social thought, which he

expressed especially through his philosophy of education. What really united the thinkers of

pragmatism was their conviction between thinking and doing.

4.2. CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE (1839–1914)

He conceived pragmatism as a method for classifying the meaning of specific difficult idea. Thus,

if you have any idea/expression, it should be important on human life, consider the practical effects

of the object of your conception, and those effects become the whole of the object of your

conception. To him, truth is the property or quality of an idea.

19

4.3. William James (1842–1910)

He spelled out a pragmatic theory of truth as whatever is “expedient in the way of our thinking”.

He considered pragmatism to be both a method for analyzing philosophical problems and also a

theory of truth. Truth is what “works”, what “turns out all right”, what “would be better to believe”,

what “we ought to believe”.

4.4. John Dewey (1859–1952)

He developed a theory of knowledge essentially in terms of the biological and psychological role

that the knowing-process plays in human affairs, and then tried to employ this conception as a

guide in directing the application of human intellectual activities to contemporary social problems.

For him, as the human being is in conflict with his material environment, active thinking and doing

are intimately related in his attempt to adjust and survive in his environment.

4.5. Analytical Philosophy

Analytical philosophy is a dominant movement of philosophical activity in the contemporary

English-speaking World. The rallying point of all analytical philosophers is their agreement on the

central method of philosophy: clarifying the meaning of language.

4.6. Logical Atomism

It flourished, especially in England, in the 1920's and 1930's; but it has declined since then. The

reason for its declination was the rise of logical positivism; another philosophy influenced by the

development of mathematical logic. It holds that, the world is made up of independent existing

things which yet works in relation to each other. To understand reality, you have to break this

existing things into smaller parts known as atomic facts. Thus, there are only atomic facts so that

when you encounter molecular facts, those are misleading and we encounter them in the ordinary

use of language. Now when you encounter them, put them into logical form, break them down into

atomic form so that you can now find the truthfulness of the atomic proposition. Some of the

logical atomists were Gottlob Frege (1848-1925), G. E. Moore (1873-1958), Bertrand Russell

(1872-1970) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951). While Moore set out to analyse common-

sense language, Russell tried to analyse "facts" for the purpose of inventing a new language, which

would have the exactness and rigor of mathematics.

20

4.7. Logical Positivism

It is a philosophical movement initiated by a group of Austhro German thinkers. They constituted

the Vienna circle. They claim that, philosophy is not a theory but an activity. Among them are;

Wittgenstein, Moritz Schlick, Rudolf Carnap, and A. J. Ayer.

4.8. Wittgenstein

In his book “Tractatus philosophicus’, he proposed that, philosophy is not a theory but an activity.

Thus, the task of philosophy will be to clarify every statement, every scientific assertion, every

proposition and as it clarifies, philosophy should be able to raise some of these propositions as

scientific, others as mathematical, so that those of philosophy such as metaphysics are

meaningless. For instance, “God is omnipotent” is nonsensical.

4.9. Rudolph Carnap (1891–1970)

In his book “Philosophy and Logical Syntax”, he stated that, the task of philosophy is logical

analysis and that task of logical analysis is to bring out their sense and connection in everyday life

so that we can know that it is sensible or not. For him testing for the meaning of a given proposition

is known as verification. Therefore, any statement that cannot be verified with this principle is not

meaningful.

4.10. EXISTENTIALISM

Existentialism is a philosophical movement or school of thought which posits that, the human

person and his existence should be the starting point of his philosophical reflection. To understand

the human person and his existence, there should be some factors (branches of science) such as

Psychology, Biology, Physics, and Anthropology to help us.

4.11. Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

He saw human life in terms of paradoxes: The human self, which combines mind and body, is

itself a paradox and contradiction.

4.12. Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)

21

He argued that humanity finds itself in an incomprehensible, indifferent world. Human beings can

never hope to understand why they are here; instead, each individual must choose a goal and follow

it with passionate conviction.

4.13. Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)

He declared that human beings require a rational basis for their lives but are unable to achieve one,

and thus human life is a "futile passion”.

4.14. Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)

He claimed that, the fundamental creative force that motivates all creation is the will to power. We

all seek to affirm ourselves, to flourish and to dominate. Since we are essentially unequal in ability,

it is expected that the fittest will survive and be victorious over the weaker. For him God plays no

role in our culture - except as a protector of the slave morality, including the idea of equal worth

of persons. He suggests that the rise of the morality of the noble person based on the virtues of the

high courage, discipline, and intelligence, in the pursuit of self-affirmation and excellence.

Questions

¾ Mention three (3) contemporary philosophers and their influence in the contemporary era.

¾ What effect does the study of the History of Contemporary Philosophy has on your

formation?

22

5. INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY

5.0. INTRODUCTION

This exposition contains in its wings an overview of items treated in introduction to philosophy in

philosophy one, first semester with intention of helping us to be conversant and update ourselves

with the course. This is first stipulated in points below;

� The ‘whatness' of philosophy (Definition, nature & misapprehension of philosophy in the

course of history)

� Disciplines found in philosophy

� The methods used in philosophy, and finally

� The value of philosophy

5.1. WHATNESS OF PHILOSOPHY

With the ‘whatness' of philosophy, and from etymological points of view philosophy is derived

from two Greek words, Sophia (σοφια) meaning wisdom and Philos (φιλος) meaning love.

Therefore philosophy is the love of wisdom, wisdom that allow one to discover the meaning of

reality and propels him to act in upright way.

Philosophy is born with certain traits. These are;

� Philosophy is an active and not passive discipline – it ask and unpack the meaning of

questions

� It is an attitude, - it involves self-awareness and comprehensiveness

� a body of knowledge – it strengthens our mental abilities by exploring the works of the

great thinkers which has emerged in the course of history

� a tool for operation – it exposes the ambiguities of reality

5.2. DISCIPLINES IN PHILOSOPHY

23

Disciplines in philosophy is seen from two perspectives. These are the historical (ideologies

leading to certain philosophies) and the thematic (deals with the themes). The historical dimension

is seen in four parts. These are;

� Ancient Era – from 600 BC to the middle ages with philosophers like Socrates, Plato,

Aristotle and more, finding meaning of reality

� Medieval era – 9th – 16th century, with the Arabic, Jewish and the scholastics. Era of using

philosophy to explain the faith of the church especially

� Modern era – period of drawing a dichotomy between science and religion with

philosophers like René Descartes, Immanuel Kant and the rest in the 17th century

� Contemporary era – era of using philosophy to solve daily problems in the 19th century

Thematic perspective deals with the themes like; ethics, epistemology, cosmology and many more.

5.3. METHODS USED IN PHILOSOPHY

Metho4ds used in philosophy are;

� Analytic method –these are deduction from simple truths

� Synthetic method – This is based on observable facts and nothing else

� Analytic of synthetic method – The blend of the above mentioned methods

5.4. THE VALUE OF PHILOSOPHY

Philosophy can never be seen as a vain field of studies. This further stipulates that in reality

philosophy is very imperative and of which countless testimonies of thousands from within us

testify for these. Therefore some of the benefits of one studying philosophy are;

� Helping us to understand ourselves and the world

� Creates careful and systematic reasoning

� The ability to ask and address difficult questions

� It again boost our communication skills

24

In conclusion the scope of introduction to philosophy does not end with the above materials

presented but it goes a long way than these.

6. INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY

6.0. INTRODUCTION

This course is a sequel to that of the First Semester. It is aimed at getting students to delve further

into philosophy as a disciple to relate philosophy to our faith and our formation as future priests.

It also aimed at introducing us (students) to issues regarding the principles of reason as well as

certain ethical Theories and Principles.

6.1. THE PRINCIPLES OF REASON

We began the semester with the principles of Reason. Under this topic, we the definition of

principle (that is something primary that helps in explaining phenomena) and got to know that it

can be some existing force in Nature (principle of Nature and Being) and can also be Logical

Proposition or Judgment (Principle of Reason). We concentrated on the Principle of Reason and

studied the four Principles of Reason.

x Principle of identity: “A thing is what it is”. Individuals are distinct from one another and

so has individual identity, like A is A.

x Principle of Excluded Middle: “Between being and non-being there is no middle state”.

This Principle dismisses mid cases such as propositions being half correct or more or less

right. Everything is either A or Not-A.

x Principle of Sufficient Reason (Causality): it states that everything actuality exists in the

physical universe has a satisfactory explanation for its existence. Things has what causes

them into action or existence.

x Principle of Contradiction: “it is impossible for something both to be and not to be at the

same time and in the same respect”.

We then noted that these principles are self-evident (needs no external facts to comprehend) and

cannot be proven since they are primary facts itself.

25

6.2. PHILOSOPHY AND SEMINARY FORMATION

In the second chapter we looked at Philosophy and the Seminary Formation. It expressed the fact

that Theology and Philosophy share a bond in searching for the “Truth”. We used Pastores Dabo

Vobis (PDV 52) and Optatam Totius. We expanded the Chapter by takin them in categories and

looking at their importance to the Formation.

x History of Philosophy: is necessary in order to appreciate the richness of our theological

Traditions since it helps understand philosophical issues as developed in the western

philosophical Tradition; particularly in the Churches Intellectual Tradition.

x Philosophy of Nature: provides for the study of Metaphysics (helps explore the

fundamental issues concerning the nature of reality and see that reality and truth transcends

the empirical), Natural Theology (treats the existence of God and the attributes of God by

means of the natural light of Reason), Philosophical Anthropology(explore the authentic

spirituality of Man and is inalienable right and hs nuptial character that provides foundation

for the seminarians to study Theological Anthropology) and Ethics(treats general ethical

decisions mainly solid in the study of Law, freedom, responsibilities and hoe we can make

good choices in these aspects of our lives).

x Thematic Approach: looking at themes like Logic (develops the critical and analytical

abilities of the seminarian) and Epistemology (investigates the nature and properties of

knowledge, helping us to realize that human knowledge is capable of gathering from

contingent objective and necessary truth).

In the next chapter we considered the relevance of Philosophy to the Christian Faith. At the end,

we concluded that philosophy is not a threat to Christianity. It changes and contributes to the

Christian faith. Philosophy is to help us positively by using it in defending and construction of

Christian System and negatively by refutation of contrary views. We also backed the importance

with Biblical Basis like Matt 22:37, Acts 17:11, Heb 11:6 and others.

6.3. PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS

The Fourth Section dealt with general introduction to Ethics. In this topic, we noted that among

the problems ethics discussed are what constitute human happiness or well-being, relationship

26

between human happiness and right conduct, and what can reason tell us about the nature of right

conduct and human happiness. We also discussed that ethics could be divided into Normative

Ethics (studies what human beings ought to do and what ought not to do) and Meta- Ethics (which

does an enquiry into the presuppositions of normative ethics that is studying the ethical theories

itself.)

6.4. ETHICAL THEORIES

In the next content we considered Ethical Theories. These theories are the process by which a

particular ethical decision is justified. We considered theories like:

x Consequentialism: which is of the view that the value of an action derives entirely from

the value of its consequences.

x Deontologism (from ‘Deon’ which means duty): looks at one’s obligation to determine

what is ethical.

x Right Ethics: looks at choosing the paramount right among hierarchy of rights.

x Intuitionism: considers the strong feeling to something without concrete reason.

6.5. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

The Last part considered Ethics Principles, which are the primary facts in explaining an ethical

event or issue. The Principles we considered are:

x Autonomy: which is individual’s freedom to act and makes one owns his action.

x Non-Maleficence: which is a way of asserting that we have an obligation not to harm

people, simply put as “if you cannot do good do not harm”

x Beneficence: it claims that we have an obligation to help others further their interest when

we can do this without risk to ourselves.

x Informed Consent: it affords the professional and their clients the opportunity to discuss

value implication of treatment or clarify what is important for each other.

27

x Justice: is the equitable allocation of resources, right and responsibilities according to just

standard.

x Paternalism (from “Pater” Latin origin meaning ‘act like a father’): that is interfering with

the individual’s action of another or treating an individual like a child.

This Course really met it objectives as it opened to us the various content in Ethical Decisions and

the Worldview of the Cotemporary people and how to handle them when need arises.

7. PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY

7.0. INTRODUCTION

In Philosophy Two, first semester, we treated the Problems of Philosophy and these are the topics

we looked at in this course. Existentialist view of man, mind-body problem, practical application

of ethical values and animals right.

7.1. EXISTENTIALISM

In the existentialist view of man, it talks about how man came into being. Some philosophers stress

human rationalism. Plato said that the essential part of man is the human soul. He said the soul is

the faculty of reason so human beings are rational. Descartes, father of modern philosophy, defined

man as a rational entity. So he came out with three methodic doubt, which are argument of

dreaming, argument of illusion and evil demon argument.

So for the argument of dreaming he said that he slept and found himself by fire side and when he

woke up he was naked on his bed, therefore we cannot have reliable knowledge in our day to day

28

experiences with our bodily senses. The argument of illusion is that when something is looked at

from a long distance one can see it in a different way like when it shines on a tarred road. From

far one can see water ahead but when you go closer to it you don’t see any water but rather discover

it is a mirage. His most profound statement that has stood test of time is I think therefore I am. So

the only thing man can be assured and reliable of is his conscious thinking self. Therefore, the

essence of man is rationality. Soren Kierkegaard said that to be is to exist. Existence precedes

essence. He said the reality about man is that he exists.

7.2. Martin Heidegger (1899-1976)

study man under being and he said the study of being begins with man, because man is the only

being that has the capacity to ask the question of being. So examine the being of man is the best

way of approaching the question of being, what is man and where is man. Dasein is the term he

used for man. He said man live towards his present and future, he is never a finish product man is

therefore essentially free being who decide for himself. Man is his own possibility so he chose

how to leave his life but he is responsible for his own actions.

7.3. MIND-BODY PROBLEM

The mind-body problem considers the question: What is the mind per se and what is its relation to

the body, or the physical in general? It cannot be doubted that an intimate relation exists between

the mind and the body. Evidentially, what man perceives experientially depends on the way

external physical stimuli impinge on man’s sensory surfaces, and ultimately in the processes of

the brain. If, for instance, I desire a drink of water, somehow the desire causes my body to move

in the direction of the water cooler.

7.4. IDEALISM

The opposite of extreme materialism is idealism. For the idealist, the mind is the most basic reality.

The physical world exists only as an appearance to or an expression of the mind. The term was

originally used by Christian Wolff (1679-17540). According to him, idealists were those who

acknowledged ideal objects existing in our minds and denied the independent reality of the world

and the existence of material bodies. Idealism is most predominantly associated with Bishop

George Berkeley (1685-1753). So for Bishop George Berkeley the mind and its perceptions are

the only things that exist. The fundamental stuff of existence is mind and not matter.

29

Again the practical application of ethical values, which also deal with some assumptions at

workplaces like identified Personal Standards. In this case one should not presume that workers

carry their moral standards to the job. We must ensure that we rather clearly stipulate the laws

required for our workers to work with so that they will be aware of the rules.

7.5. RIGHTS OF ANIMALS

The basic question here is, what place should non – human animal have in an acceptable moral

system. Philosophical thinking on the moral standing of animals is diverse and we have indirect

theories. These theories deny animals of moral status or equal consideration with humans due to a

lack of consciousness, reason or autonomy. They ultimately deny moral status to animals yet they

may still require not harming animals but only because doing so causes harm to a human being’s

morality. Immanuel Kant, Rene Descartes, Thomas Aquinas are among the proponents of this

school of thought.

Also Carl Cohen said animals have no right. He said right is a claim one party may exercise against

another. Right can only exist among beings who can make moral claims. The attributes in human

beings that makes them capable of making moral claims against others are lacking in animals.

These attributes are intellectual. Therefore, animals do not have rights.

The importance of this course to my formation is that it has help me to know that I am responsible

for any choices I make. Therefore, if I am making any choice in life or in my formation I have to

make a good one that will help me and also the one that I can give a good account of.

Also the practical application of ethical values has helped me to appreciate some rule and

regulation in the seminary which will help me in my formation.

Descartes said that I think therefore I am, do you agree with that statment.

8. INTRODUCTION TO ETHICS

8.0. INTRODUCTION

Ethics is derived from the Greek word ethikos that relates to ethos or character. Ethikos refers to

theory or character. Ethics is a major branch of philosophy, encompassing right conduct and good

life. Therefore, ethics is a search for a rational understanding of the principles of human conduct.

The ethicist is not concerned with all human behavior but with the sort of behavior called conduct,

30

in which persons make voluntary choices between alternative courses of action. Ethics’ is

generally used in 3 different but related ways and they are; ethics used as a general pattern or way

of life. E.g., Buddhists or Christian ethics that is a set of principles that prescribe the behavior of

those who are Buddhists or Christians etc. Again, ethics is used as a set of rules of conduct or

‘moral code’; e.g. professional ethics/medical ethics. The code that regulates and guides the

behavior of professionals or doctors/nurses etc. lastly, ethics is used as an enquiry about ways of

life and rules of conduct; e.g. a branch of philosophy that is frequently called “meta-ethics”. It

refers to a theoretical study of theories concerning such questions as ‘How people ought to

behave?’ ‘What is the good life for people?’ etc.

8.1. TYPES OF ETHICS

Ethics is divided into two main parts, meta-ethics and substantive ethics. Meta-ethics is the study

of the nature of moral judgments and how moral language functions. It is concerned primarily with

the meaning of ethical judgments and/or prescriptions and with the notion of which properties, if

only, are responsible for the truth or validity thereof. Substantive ethics deals with what actually

is good or bad, right or wrong, admirable or contemptible. It is further divided into two: theoretical

ethics and practical ethics. Theoretical ethics gives a general account of the nature of good and bad

conduct and character. Applied or practical ethics deals with particular moral issues such as war,

abortion and capital punishment, and with social issues such as racism and sexism.

There are two kinds of moral reasoning which serve as approach to or aspects of ethics and they

are; reasons for or against a particular kind of action as such; e.g. promise keeping and causing

needless offence. Also, reason for or against having certain disposition of character (being a person

of a certain disposition or tendency); e.g. honesty or dishonesty, courage or cowardice (being an

honest or a courageous person and not being a dishonest or a cowardly one).

8.2. MORAL AND NATURAL GOODS

31

In ethics, there is a difference between moral and natural goods. Moral goods are those that have

to do with the conduct of persons, usually leading to praise or blame. Natural goods, on the other

hand, have to do with objects not persons. For example, to say that “Mary is a morally good” might

involve a different sense of “good” than that in the sentence “a banana split is good”. Ethics is

more interested in moral goods than natural goods.

8.3. INSTRUMENTAL AND INTRINSIC GOODS

Further, ethics try to distinguish instrumental and intrinsic goods. An instrumental good is worth

having as a means towards getting something else that is good (e.g. a laptop is instrumentally good

in order to hear music or watch movies). And an intrinsically good thing is worth having for itself,

even if it doesn’t help one get anything else that is good. (E.g. the sound of beautiful music). But

these are not mutually exclusive categories. Some things are both good in themselves, and also

good for getting other things that are good.

8.4. REALISM AND CONSTRUCTIVISM

Realism and constructivism are two main approaches to the question of truth. Realism is the

approach which operates with a correspondence theory of truth that maintains that a statement is

true if it corresponds to a state of affairs independent of the statement. E.g. the statement “a bag is

white” is true if and only if a bag is in fact white. While constructivism approach maintains that

truth is dependent on the evidence for moral statements or the verification conditions that would

establish their truth. It operate with the coherence theory of truth that maintains that a statement is

true, if it coheres or fits in with other true statements. Constructivists is further divided into two;

relativists and non-relativists. Constructivist relativists they maintain that moral statements are true

if they cohere with other true moral statements made within a particular society or a particular

form of life. They may consider moral statements to be subjective because they depend on the

views of a particular group of people. While constructivist non-relativists they maintain that moral

statements are true if they cohere with other true moral statements. They, however, consider moral

statements to be objective because they maintain that there is a single set of true moral statements

that can only be arrived at when perfect coherence has been reached.

The generally understanding of ethics as the search for a rational understanding of the principles

of human conduct, began with the ancient Greeks. Even though the ethical theories of various eras

32

differ, we can identify a clear line of continuity from Socrates, Plato and Aristotle through

Hellenistic, Roman and Medieval thought to the present day. Greeks uses these two words

eudaimonia and arête to define what ethics is. Eudaimonia; Greek word commonly translated as

happiness or welfare; however, “human flourishing” has been proposed as a more accurate

translation. Etymologically, it consists of the words “eu” (good) and “daimon” (spirit). Arête, is

translated into English as virtue. One problem is that we see virtue in the moral sense but for the

Greek, Arête, pertains to all sorts of qualities we would not regard as relevant to ethics, for example

physical beauty.

8.5. PLATO

Plato maintains a virtue based eudaemonistic ethics: human well-being (eudaemonia) becomes the

highest aim of moral thought or conduct, with the virtues (arête) as requisite skills and character-

traits. He says that, human’s virtue lies in the person’s ability of fitness to perform proper function

in the world. Attributing virtue to the soul, he divided them into three (intellect, will and emotions)

with each part exhibiting a particular virtue. The intellect has wisdom which does the reasoning as

its virtue, the will has courage and emotions has temperance or self-control as its virtue. According

to him, the ultimate virtue is justice which co-ordinate all the parts; the intellect, will and the

emotions to perform proper function.

8.6. ARISTOTLE

According to Aristotle, good life for human beings is a life of happiness (eudaimonia). For him

happiness is the activity of the soul in accord with perfect virtue. By this, it is believed that Aristotle

is stressing the fact that happiness is not something that is static, but rather an activity. Therefore

happiness is something that accompanies certain activities of the soul. It is a way of engaging in

the various activities of life, such as eating, studying and so on. If one engages in these activities

in a certain way, then we can say that the person is happy. The virtues are precisely those qualities

the possession of which will enable an individual to achieve eudaimonia. Virtue he says, is the

mean that is within two extremes, virtue is moderation. For e.g. Aristotle says that the virtue

between cowardice and rashness is courage. He says people lived differently because what might

be good to one will be bad to the other. Later divides the soul into rational and irrational, he further

divided the irrational into the vegetative and the desiderative. The vegetative aspects causes the

33

basic needs of a person such as food and rest needed for nutrition and growth. While the

desiderative is associated with the desires and wants of a person which can be controlled and made

submissive. He divides the rational into two; the calculative and scientific. The scientific makes

knowledge about facts and calculative thinks and takes decision.

8.7. HEDONISM

In Hellenistic and Roman ethics various doctrines came among those are hedonism, cynicism and

stoicism. The hedonism held that the attainment of maximum pleasure as the main spring of human

action in the pursuit of good life. Two theories emerge Cyrenaic hedonism and Epicureanism. The

Cyrenaic hedonism held that gratification for one’s immediately good without regarding the other

person is the supreme end of existence. They equated pleasure with happiness and held that

pleasure is man’s highest attainable good. Virtue, they say is the means whereby we can achieve

pleasure and increase our capacity for enjoyment. The Epicureanism held that true pleasure is

attainable only by reason. They stressed increase of pleasure and minimize of pain, that people

must live a life of self-control and prudence.

8.8. CYNICISM

Cynicism is derived from the Greek word ‘kunos’ which means dog-like ones’ is believed to have

originated from the way of life of its founder Diogenes of Sinope is said to have lived in a dog’s

hut. They believed that pleasure could not be attained in temporal material things. For them fruits

of civilization such as marriage, property, religion are all worthless. They believed that the world

is fundamental evil and if we trust our happiness in them, we found ourselves betrayed. If a person

is to find salvation in the world he/she must find it within himself/herself and this is what virtue

consists in. the essence of virtue, they said is self-control and is teachable.

8.9. STOICISM

Stoicism unlike the cynicism, held of the view that the denial of the material world and the life of

asceticism do not provide happiness. For them happiness consisted in right frame of the mind.

Everything in the world has been fixed by God or nature according to some preconceived plan.

Nature is orderly and rationally, and only a life in harmony with nature can be good. Therefore a

person is said to be virtuous when he/she accept what happens and understand that all these are

34

part of divine arrangement that one is powerless to change. All that one has to do is to be indifferent

to the world.

8.10. CHRISTIAN/ MEDIEVAL ETHICS

Christian/medieval ethics were dominant during the medieval era. They were much concerned

with critical evaluation of human conduct from a Christian perspective. The emergence of

Christianity brought new mode of ethics by introducing a religious conception of good into western

thought. Christian ethics is centered on the life, teachings, mystery and death of Jesus Christ as the

revelation of God. Due to variations within orthodoxy, there appears no homogenous philosophy

labelled Christian ethics.

8.11. MODERN ETHICS

Modern moral philosophy emerged from consideration of the question if there are no divinely

ordained laws, what can tell us when we may proceed? In general, most ethical doctrines in the

modern era stress one or several of the features found in ancient ethics. The variability of human

nature, customs and institutions is not as great as some contemporary students of society would

have us believe.

8.12. RATIONALISM

In the rationalist tradition, Descartes held that we have an innate idea of God, and that from this a

God-centered ethics follows at once. Spinoza’s ethics has much in common with the stoic doctrine.

He held that God permeates the universe and is indeed identical with it. We ourselves become

attune to the divine by living in accordance with nature.

8.13. UTILITARIANISM

On the other side, we have the Utilitarian doctrine of Bentham and Mill that decides problems of

good and evil in terms of the greatest good for the greatest number. As a theory, it fails to cope

with injustice inflicted on the individual for the sake of supposed benefit to the community (e.g.

compulsory purchase of somebody’s home at a very low price in order that a road may be built).

However, as a practical procedure it is much used for weighing private against public interest (that

notion itself needs examining).

35

9. PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS

9.0. INTRODUCTION

Philosophical Ethics is much concern with the application of analysis to moral theories as an

approach in the modern or contemporary times. It seeks to establish positions not by empirical

methods, extra-rational approaches, or non-rational strategies. However, Philosophical Ethics is

based on the careful rational scrutiny of alternative positions and theories. It could be seen that

Classical ethical theories appear to offer statement of advice but Philosophical ethics seek to clarify

the terms in moral statement to make them open for one to decide base on alternative actions to

undertake.

In the beginning of the course we set out to examine some ethical theories that put brakes on our

effort to answer the basic ethical question ‘what ought I to do?’ These moral skeptical theories

question the possibility of human freedom and moral knowledge. The theories include

psychological egoism, determinism, ethical relativism and emotivism. However, according to

Borchert and Stewart, the fundamental moral question ‘what ought I to do?’ presupposes that we

are free to pursue genuine alternative actions.

9.1. PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM

Now these are the ways by which they constrict freedom, for instance psychological egoism

narrows the range of human actions to egoistic ones.

9.2. DETERMINISM

Determinism eliminates freedom by making human beings subject to hereditary and environmental

forces beyond their control.

9.3. ETHICAL RELATIVISM

36

With ethical relativism there are no objective criteria for evaluating actions. Also ethical

emotivism eliminates the possibility of objective criteria for evaluating actions by interpreting

moral language as having no cognitive content.

9.4. WHAT MAKES AN ACT RIGHT?

Also in the same course we looked at how in answering the fundamental ethical question, ‘what

ought I to do?’ under normative ethics can lead us into further question ‘what makes an act right?’

In answering the question, two major answers came to be discussed.

9.5. TELEOLOGICAL ETHICS/ CONSEQUENCIALISM

Ethicists who are of the teleological view argue that an action may be right or wrong depending

on its consequences. Under the teleological view, we have two sub views one about Actualizing

human nature; this primarily emphasize individual happiness and self-actualization. The other

view as Maximizing human happiness or utilitarianism which emphasize the consequences of an

action for society as a whole.

9.6. DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS

According to the deontological ethicists they recognize a sense of duty rather than consequences

of action as the determining factor of right or wrong. There are two sub views under the

deontological view, one is Divine authority theory which says that the rightness of an action is

seen as a duty to follow the dictates of divine authority like obedience to the will of God. Then

another view as the Duty theory which realizes right or wrong of an action in following the

commands of reason.

9.7. APPLIED ETHICS

Under Applied Ethics we looked at how some of the moral theories could help us examine some

ethical issues in medicine. Bioethics is the study and the application of moral values, rights and

duties in the fields of medical treatment and research. Medical practitioners have a duty not to

cause harm to their client if they cannot offer them help.

9.8. ABORTION

37

Examining abortion as first topic here we came to the realization that there are various argument

presented by those in favor of abortion and those who are against abortion. These various

arguments some place emphasis on the ‘foetus factor’ as the foetus being a human being who has

feelings and right to life. Also concerning the commandment do not kill, the foetus is a potential

human being. Another area to consider here is the rights issues as in the right to life, right of self-

rule, the origin of right and what kind of beings have right. Some women’s right argument in favor

of abortion, such as women have moral right to decide what to do with their bodies and as right

being vital for gender equality. The issue of responsibility of the mother thus she must be

responsible for her free voluntary actions. Then finally with the issue of choice.

9.9. EUTHANASIA

Another issue of concern in the area of health matters is euthanasia the practice of mercifully

ending a person’s life in order to release the person from an incurable disease, intolerable suffering,

or undignified death.

10. INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC

10.0. INTRODUCTION

This work contains the summary of introduction to logic, a course lectured in philosophy one (first

semester) by Very. Rev. Father Francis Arthur.

Introduction to logic is a branch of philosophy. This course have been divided into four parts. The

first parts deals with the introduction to logic in which several definitions are imbedded, describing

the structure of an argument, types of arguments and how to determine the truth and validity of an

arguments. The second part deals with Language: the three basic functions of language and kinds

of Agreement and Disagreement. The third part echoes on the Informal Fallacies and the last part

also speaks about Definition (five purposes and five types of Definition).

The word “LOGIC” comes from the Greek LOGOS, which means discourse. The study of logic

began in ancient Greece when men set to work to master the guiding principles of discourse.

Therefore, logic is still a discipline of discourse. A discourse is a connected thought, express in

words. Several definitions of logic have been constructed due to the criticisms encountering it and

these definitions includes, Logic as the study of the methods and principles used to distinguish

good (correct) and bad (incorrect) reasoning. Again, Logic has frequently been defined as the

38

Science of the laws of thought. Another common definition of logic call it the Science of

Reasoning.

10.1. WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?

An argument is any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from others, which

are regarded as providing grounds for the truth of that one. It is a set of assertive sentences one of

which is presented as a conclusion, the others as premises. Argument must have a premise and a

conclusion or must contain premises and conclusion. The conclusion of an argument is that

proposition which is affirmed on the basis of the other propositions. These other proposition which

are affirmed as providing grounds or reasons for accepting the conclusion are the premises. We do

not determine an argument base on the position of the proposition.

10.2. TYPES OF ARGUMENTS

Generally, arguments are traditionally divided into two types, deductive and inductive.

10.3. DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT

Deductive arguments occurs if the conclusion follows necessarily or with certainty from the

premises. The fundamental property of a deductively valid argument is this: if its premises are

true, then its conclusion must also be true. Or the premises cannot be true while the conclusion is

false in itself. The form of deductive argument include, moving from general truth to general truth

or from particular truth to particular truth. The truth of the premises “guarantees” the truth of its

conclusion. Deductive logic is concerned with the rules for determining when an argument is valid.

10.4. INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT

In contrast to deductively valid arguments, the truth of the premises of an inductively correct

argument provides good, but not conclusive grounds for accepting its conclusion. Its conclusion is

probable, but not certain and premises do not provide conclusive grounds for the truth of its

conclusion. They rather give some grounds for its probability. In inductive argument, we move

from particular truth to general truth, general to general truth and particular to particular truth.

Therefore, a valid argument is demonstrated when the premises are true and the conclusion is also

true or with false premises and a false conclusion. This form is called “Sound arguments”. The

vice versa is the unsound arguments, thus arguments with true premises and a false conclusion.

39

Inductive logic is concerned with the inferences which are probable, given as evidence the truth of

certain propositions, upon which they are based.

10.5. LANGUAGE

Language is a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized

signs, sounds, gestures, marks having understood meanings. The use of language can be divided

into three very general categories: namely, informative, expressive and directive.

a. INFORMATIVE

Informative language is the knowledge acquired by formulating, affirming and presenting an

arguments or denying proposition. It is used to describe the world and to reason about it. Discourse

as informative can be true or false.

b. EXPRESSIVE

Language serves the expressive function whenever it is used to vent or to arouse feelings or

emotions. Poetry serves as the best analogy of the expressive function. Discourse as expressive is

neither true nor false. Expressive discourse, then is used either to express the speaker’s feelings or

to evoke certain feelings on the part of the auditor or both.

c. DIRECTIVE

Directive language is used for the purpose of causing or preventing action. A perfect example are

commands and requests. In its imperative form, directive discourse is neither true nor false.

10.6. AGREEMENT AND DISAGREEMENT

There are four combination of agreement and disagreement: namely, Agreement in belief and

attitude, Agreement in belief but disagreement in attitude, Disagreement in belief but Agreement

in attitude and Disagreement in belief and attitude.

10.7. FALLACIES

Fallacies are mistakes in reasoning. They are very clever in distinguishing themselves as

arguments. Fallacious arguments are basically deceptive. Fallacies can be divided into two broad

40

categories called formal and informal fallacies. Informal fallacies can be divided into two groups:

fallacies of reverence and of ambiguity. Fallacies of reverence includes, Argumentum ad Baculum

(Appeal to force), Argumentum ad hominem (abusive), False cause, Hasty Generalization, just to

mention a few.

Fallacies of ambiguity includes, Equivocation, Amphiboly, Accent, division and composition.

There are various occasions when definitions can be serve a useful purpose, and we distinguish at

least five purposes of definition. This includes, To increase Vocabulary, To Eliminate Ambiguity,

To Reduce Vagueness and others. There are five types of definition which includes, Stipulative,

Lexical, Précising, Theoretical and Persuasive definitions. There are kinds of meanings namely:

extension or denotation and intension or connotation. There are three different senses in which the

term “connotation” may be used: the subjective, objective and conventional connotation.

10.8. THE RELEVANCE OF LOGIC IN THE FORMATION OF SEMINARIANS

1. The study of logic has train my mind to draw the right conclusion and to avoid the wrong.

2. Logic has helped me to correct minor inaccuracies; logical analysis had also drills my mind

into exactitude.

3. Logic has helped me to acquire and retain knowledge and to detect a bad argument.

4. The study of logic has given me clarity, precision and firmness in my expression.

5. Consistency in thought and speech, in feeling, character and action is a mark of rationality

and a fruit of logic.

6. Finally, the study of logic has given me certain techniques, certain easily applied methods

for testing the correctness of many different kinds of reasoning.

41

11. INFORMAL LOGIC

11.0. INTRODUCTION

Interacting with others is not always a smooth flow of thoughts and ideas. It normally comes in

the form differences in opinion and this requires advancing systematic arguments in other to make

your point clear. Logic aims to develop a system of methods and principles that we may use as

criteria for evaluating the arguments of others and as guides in constructing arguments of our own

(Hurley, 2015).

Due to our limitations we can make sense of few or particular experiences at a time. And we

sometimes seek to form other conclusions out of it. Thus we try to formulate hypothesis, offer

explanations, make predictions and show causal connections. Achieving this we use a process

called Induction. Induction is making inference of a generalized conclusion from a single or

particular instances. Induction is the process of proving universal principles from particular cases

such that what is true in a particular case is true in all similar cases. It a theory based on the

principle of causation; that every fact has a beginning and a cause. A theory of inference which

help us to proceed from the known to the unknown.

From above we can reason that in induction our conclusions are based on probability or are

uncertain. The conclusion does not flow with certainty and necessity from the premises. The

commonest form of this argument is the argument by analogy.

11.1. ARGUMENT BY ANALOGY

Their conclusion are not termed as valid or invalid but are only useful in lively description in the

form of metaphors or similes. So to draw an analogy between two or more entities is to show one

or more instances in which they are similar. Schematically where; Kofi, Yaw, and Kwaku have

the same attribute A and B.

Kofi and Yaw the attribute C.

We can therefore say Kwaku probably has the attribute C.

Analogical arguments we can say have conclusion which may be appraised as more probable or

less probable. Such probability can established based on some criterion. 1) that the more the

number of incidence in the premises the higher the probability of the conclusion; 2) if there is more

42

resemblance in the premises it can affect the conclusion; 3) the analogies must be relevant. Thus

there must be a causal connection between the entities etc.

11.2. MILL’S METHOD

Events do not happen by themselves but only under certain conditions. These conditions may be

described as the cause of the events. The condition in absence an event cannot occur is called a

necessary condition- sunlight is necessary photosynthesis. Also the condition in whose presence

an event must occur is referred to as sufficient conditions. The mills method is an example of

inductive reference. Mills came out with five methods namely method of agreement, method of

difference, joint method of difference and agreement, method of residue and the concomitant

variation. The method of agreement for example states that ‘if two or more instances of the

phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common, the circumstance in

which alone all the circumstances agree, is the cause of the phenomenon.’ The method is not

sufficient for discovering causation.

11.3. THE VALUE OF SCIENCE

The value of science in our lives and the academia. We cannot overlook the value of this subject

in the growth and development of the human race and our ability to adapt and dominate our world.

Through communication and transportation it has reduced the space and time gab; discovering

new sources of energy etc. have improved our living condition. An explanation in science is a

group of statements from which the thing to be explained can be logically inferred and whose

acceptance removes its problematic character. This may be scientific or unscientific. The scientific

explanation is widely accepted and can be evaluated based on its relevance, testability,

compatibility with previously well-established hypothesis, predictive power and simplicity. From

the study of logic is very essential in our lives. Be it in the academia or ordinary life we use the

principles of logic either knowingly or otherwise. As students of philosophy and future priests

there is need for us to commit what we study to memory and make it relevant in our daily lives.

Question

1. Briefly explain to an uneducated person what informal logic is about

43

2. To what extent can you say that informal logic has equip you as a seminarian for future

ministry.

12. SYMBOLIC LOGIC

12.0. INTRODUCTION

Symbolic is from the Greek word “symbolikos” which means a mark or sign or word that indicates

something. It means using a sign or a mark to represent an argument. So here we arguments are

represented by signs and symbols and marks.

Symbolic Logic is a modern development of formal logic that employs a special symbolism.

Symbolic logic is a type of logic that uses mathematics or philosophical symbols to show

relationships. It uses signs and symbols to represent arguments for easy understanding. Logic may

be defined as the organized body of knowledge, or science that evaluates arguments. Under this

course we limited ourselves to what we describe as ‘propositional logic’. Some of the topics we

treated include Symbols and Translation, Truth Functions, Truth Tables for Propositions, Truth

Tables for Arguments, Indirect Truth Tables, and Argument Forms and Fallacies.

Logic introduces various simplifying procedures to dispel some obscurities. Just as in syllogism

we use letters to represent terms and techniques were developed to reduce syllogisms to what is

called standard form, under propositional logic, form recognition is facilitated through the

introduction of special symbols called ‘Operators, or ‘connectives’ such as the dot, horse shoe,

triple bar, tilde and the wedge operators. When arguments are expressed in terms of these symbols,

determining validity often becomes a matter of mere visual inspection. Here, statements are

represented by letters, and these letters are then combined by means of the operators to form a

more complex symbolic representations. For example, if the chief grave-digger has extra-ordinary

jaws bones then the coffin bearer will have a huge head; G ) C.

12.1. TRUTH FUNCTION

The topic Truth Function shows how truth tables accomplish something with the five logical

operators. A truth table gives us a “complete view” of an operator by showing how it functions

44

under all possible conditions. It helps us to compute the truth values of more-complicated

propositions.

12.2. TRUTH TABLE

Truth Tables for Propositions show us whether the truth table of a given proposition has the final

column to be all true which renders the proposition to be one thing, and whether the final column

is all false which also renders to be something else. So if we have 1, 2, 3,4,5,6 propositions, the

number of lines in the truth table will be 2,4,8,16,32 and 64 respectively; thus, the formula, L=2*n.

This provides the standard technique for testing the validity of arguments in propositional logic.

The Indirect Truth Tables provides a shorter and faster method for testing the validity of arguments

than do ordinary truth tables. It can also be used to test a series of statements for consistency. It

usually require one line instead of about 32 lines when using the truth table.

12.3. ARGUMENT FORMS AND FALLACIES

Argument Forms and Fallacies show that simple arguments must conform to certain patterns to be

valid. If such an argument breaks the pattern, anyone familiar with logic like Azaglo will recognize

the argument as fallacious. Symbolic logic will help the would-be priests to easily determine the

validity of an argument by a mere glance or visual inspection when these arguments are reduced

into symbols. The would-be priests derive the skills needed to construct sound arguments of his

own and to evaluate the arguments of his contemporaries. It provides a fundamental defense

against a prejudiced and uncivilized society. It makes us think before we construct any argument

or proposition. Since it is the key to all learning, it challenges us to make sound and valid

arguments. It makes us to be smart and sharp in our thinking. It restrains us from committing any

fallacy and prevents us from making quick judgment. It distinguishes the rational from the

irrational, the sane from the insane. We listen more for us to punch holes into others unsound and

invalid arguments.

Logic and for that matter symbolic logic will play a pivotal role in our future ministry, helping us

to present sound arguments and being clear in our thought, in our sermons and in our deliveries.

45

13. POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

13.0. INTRODUCTION

A critical observation in every society will reveal two fundamental facts; as a rule, every man

desires to have his own way, to think and act as he likes and at the same time, everyone cannot

have his own way because he lives in a society. One man’s desire conflict with those of another,

hence, the relations of the individual members in society need regulations. When a body of people

organized as a unit for the purpose of government is set up, then it is said to be politically

organized.

Politics come from the Greek word: polis (Gk, πολισ) which means a city or a community. Politics

embraces the study of behaviour of individuals within a group context. However, transposing

politics to the philosophical circles, political philosophy can be defined to be the philosophical

reflection and meditations on how best we can arrange our collective life – our political institutions

and social practices, such as our economic system and our pattern of family life. Political

philosophers seek to establish basic principles that will, for example. Justify a particular form of

state, show that individuals have certain inalienable rights or tell us how the material resources of

society can be evenly distributed for the collective good.

In this discipline, classical thought on how best we can arrange our collective lifestyles was

exposed to us. The meditations of Plato and Aristotle proved a blueprint on how best the state can

be organized to secure the good of the state first of all and the individual who occupy space in the

state.

13.1. PLATO’S POLITICS

Plato signatures in his Republic that a state where all the classes work in harmony; doing what is

expected of one will amount to an ideal state. For Plato, the classes of the society are the guardians,

the auxiliaries and the artisans. The duty of the guardians are to guard or better still rule in the

polity, the auxiliary on the other hand function to protect the community from external and internal

attacks and the artisans provide the basic necessities to the sustenance of the citizenry. When this

is duly done then the ideal state can emerge. The kind of government which Plato supports is that

which the Philosopher (guardian) rules.

46

13.2. ARISTOTLE’S POLITICS

In the Politics I, Aristotle stresses the element of purpose. Just like human beings, the state is

naturally endowed with a distinctive function. Combining these ideas, Aristolte says that, “It is

evident that the state is creature and that human beings are by nature political animals” He views

that the end of the state is to ensure the Supreme good of the people, namely; our moral and

intellectual life. Unlike Plato who provides a blueprint to an ideal state, Aristotle on the other side

says that at appropriate circumstances a community will organize itself into at least three different

kinds of government. The forms of government according to him are, Monarchy (One),

Aristocracy (Few) and Polity (Many) and their perverted forms are Tyranny, Oligarchy and

Democracy. The best practicable government is the Polity or the constitutional government – a

mixture of democracy and oligarchy.

13.3. MEDIEVAL ERA

These classical thoughts provided grounds for the development of latter philosophies as regards

politics. In the Medieval era, philosophers like St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas as well added

to scope with the theories.

13.4. ST. AUGUSTINE

In his book ‘Civitate Dei’ (City of God) Augustine propounds that there are two types of cities,

namely; the city of God and the city of Man. He holds that though the two provide influential

standards for judgement, one is positive and the other negative. Augustine was of the view that

although both cities are co-mingled, in any historical state, any actual political communities closer

to the city of Man than to God. And of course in a clash the latter will triumph and that is where

we should strive to attain.

13.5. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS

Whereas Augustine holds a more pessimistic view on the possibilities of the good political life on

earth, Aquinas is more optimistic. He viewed the political communities and its possibilities for

human fulfilment more positively than Augustine did. A good political life requires life in the

community.

47

13.6. MODERN ERA

13.7. NICCOLO di BERNADO MACHIAVELLI

Niccolo di Bernado Machiavelli, a modern political philosopher gives a map to the attainment and

the maintenance of power in a state. In his book, The Price, Machiavelli moves to this agenda.

Taking into account the political circumstances of his time, Machiavelli says that the ruler (Prince)

if possible must develop the act of deception and whatever necessary even abandon traditional

moral virtues for political survival. Despite this recommendation, Machiavelli opines that to

succeed in protecting the political communities’ vital interest, there must be reliance on virtuous

people, a mixed constitution including a balance of social classes, government under law, popular

participation and public opinion, inter alia. The mixed and balanced constitution is Machiavelli’s

preferred constitution; the equilibrium is to be political, economic and socially stable. Good laws

are crucial to good governance. A Prince might be superior in making laws but the people are

superior in maintaining the laws. A government under good laws will be stable and prudent.

13.8. THOMAS HOBBES

Further on, the curtain was raised to us on how the state originates. The works of Thomas Hobbes,

John Locke and J.J Rousseau are worth mentioning. Thomas Hobbes in the book the Leviathan

exposes the origins of the state from his perspective. According to him, with the analysis of human

nature posits that man is by nature selfish, in that, man is moved to action not by his intellect or

reason but by his appetite, desires and passion. This state of living is devoid of laws of governance

and that the only standing law is the ‘desires of reason’. Hobbes terms this kind of state, a state of

nature which is characterized by war, nasty, solitary, poor, brutish and short. This is because it is

of everyone against everyone. Therefore the only way of curbing this menace is to give up so much

of their natural right as they are inconsistent of living in peace. A Supreme cohesive power is thus

instituted. In his words, “I authorize and give out my right of governing myself to this ma or this

assembly of men on this condition that you will give out your right to him and authorize your

actions in like manner”. A state is thus created.

13.9. POWER, AUTHORITY, AND LEGITIMACY

48

The course also brought to the limelight some grounds for political obligations; Power, Authority

and Legitimacy. These factors are put in place to maintain the contemporary state of human

society. These, when wielded places the person in question on a certain pedestal and gives him

some amount of respect in the society.

13.10. CONSTITUTION

Having established the fact that everyone’s desire cannot be expressed to the person’s measure,

every organized state therefore put in certain rules and laws to ensure the smooth running and

development of the community. These are known as the Constitution; as a body of fundamental

principles or established precedents according to which a state or organization is governed. In deed

the concepts of political philosophers leaves much to be desired and provides a roadmap of

governance to the various facets of our society.

14. PHENOMENOLOGY OF RELIGION

14.0. INTRODUCTION

Phenomenology of religion is a branch of philosophy which studies religious facts.

Phenomenology is coined from the two Greek words “phainomeno” which means “that which

appears or manifests” and logos which means word or discourse. Religion on the other hand is

from the Latin word “religare” which mean “to bind”. The term phenomenology was coined by

John H. Lambert. Phenomenology of religion is therefore the study of the manifestations of

religious facts. Great thinkers such as Rudolf Otto, Gerardus van der Leeuw have made great

impact to the subject matter with their views of the “Numinous” and “Power” respectively as the

central experience. Mircea Elliade opines that the symbols of religion are typically profane in

literal interpretation but are of cosmic significance when viewed as signs of the sacred. The

course discusses religion, its origin and growth, the concept of God and his existence, the problem

of evil, Theodicy and Life after death.

14.1. RELIGION

49

What is Religion? According to C.P Tiele, religion is in truth, that pure and reverential disposition

or frame of mind which we call piety. Generally there are two main views in regard to the

definition of religion. Namely the substantive and the functionalist. Whiles the substantive

perspective centers on the belief content, the functionalists stress on the functions.

Several scholars have dealt with the origin of religion. Among them are John Lubbock who opined

that religion began with atheism. E. B Tylor also claimed the earliest form of religion is animism.

For John Frazer, it is magic, Spencer believes it is Ancestral worship and Durkheim, totemism.

The major religions even though believe in one supreme God, we are not sure if it is the same one

God in these religions because of the conception of these one God. For instance the Christian of

God as Trinity contrast with that of Islam and Judaism.

14.2. THE CONCEPT OF GOD AND HIS EXISTENCE

God seems to occupy the center of religious belief and practices. This belief takes the form

Theism, Deism and Pantheism. Disbelief in God’s existence include Atheism and Agnosticism.

Some philosophers and theologians argue that knowledge of God is possible through reason (a

priori) while others claim it is from the evidence from the world (a posteriori). Famous of the a

priori argument is Anselm’s Ontological argument which was later build upon by Rene Descartes.

14.3. ANSELM’S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

According to Anselm, God is that than which nothing greater can be thought. God exists, at least

in the understanding or in the mind. But that which exists in the mind is not as great as that which

exists both in mind and in reality. So if God exists only in the mind, he is not, that than which

nothing greater can be thought. God must therefore exist both in mind and in reality to be that than

which nothing greater can be thought. Therefore God exists.

14.4. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS’ FIVE PROOFS

On the other hand, St. Thomas Aquinas’ five proofs of existence of God forms part of the a

posteriori argument. They are (A). the proof from Motion to Prime matter.( B). The proof from

causality to first cause. (C). the proof from Contingent beings to a Necessary being. (D). the proof

from the degree of value to Absolute value. (E). evidence of purpose in nature to a Divine designer.

50

Other a posteriori claims include; the moral or axiological argument, the argument of special

events and experiences.

14.5. THEODICY

Evil is defined as something that brings sorrow, distress or calamity to the world. There are Moral

evils and Natural evils. The occurrence of these evils brings about the question of whether God is

omniscient and perfectly good as people claim; for how can this good God co-exist with all this

evil around. Finding answers to this question, brought about the Augustinian theodicy which sees

evil as the privation of good, because all that God created was good. The Iranaean theodicy places

emphasis on human free will. For Process theodicy, God has no monopoly or power over creation.

14.6. LIFE AFTER DEATH

Life after death seeks to establish the immortality of the soul. Terminologies such as immortality,

reincarnation, resurrection, and re-creation are employed to describe life after death. There exist

two sorts of arguments to establish the possibility of life after death, namely a priori philosophical

argument and a posteriori argument from certain experiences.

A posteriori argument include ; near- death or life- after- death experiences, mediumistic

communication with deceased persons, the evidence that certain persons have actually come back

to life. The a priori argument include the fact that (a). According to Aquinas, we are made for an

ultimate end – happiness. (b). since finite human existence is not sufficient to achieve moral ideal,

man must be immortal. (c).Plato’s mind body dichotomy which argues that the body belongs to

the sensible world therefore perishable but the mind (soul) is immortal because imperishable

because it is indestructible because it is simple.

REFERENCE

Doe, J.D. Lecture notes: Phenomenology of Religion

Popkin, R and Stroll, A. (1993). Philosophy Made Simple ( 2nd ed.). New York : Three Rivers

Press.

51

15. COSMOLOGY

15.0. INTRODUCTION

From its Greek etymology (kósmos =world; logos =knowledge or science) the word cosmology

means the science of the world. Is the study of the Universe in its totality, and by extension,

humanity's place in it?

Cosmology studies everything in our material universe; that is to say inorganic substances, of

plants of animals and of man himself.

Cosmology is a branch of philosophical study, and therefore excludes from its investigation

whatever forms the object of the natural sciences. While the sciences of physics and biology seek

the proximate causes of corporal phenomena, the laws that govern them, and the wonderful

harmony resulting there from, cosmology aims to discover the deeper and remoter causes which

neither observation nor experiment immediately reveals.

15.1. ORIGIN OF COSMOLOGY

The word itself is of recent origin. It was first used by Wolff when, in 1730, he entitled one of his

works "Cosmologia Generalis" (Frankfort and Leipzig).

15.2. TYPES OF COSMOLOGY

¾ Physical Cosmology

¾ Religious Cosmology

¾ Esoteric Cosmology

¾ Metaphysical Cosmology

15.3. PHYSICAL COSMOLOGY

52

PHYSICAL COSMOLOGY is the study of the largest-scale structures and dynamics of the

Universe and is concerned with fundamental questions about its origin, structure, evolution, and

ultimate fate. Physical cosmology studies the universe as a whole, draws on many branches of

physics.

15.4. RELIGIOUS COSMOLOGY

A religious cosmology is a way of explaining the origin, the history and the evolution of the cosmos

based on the religious mythology of a specific tradition. Religious cosmologies usually include an

act or process of creation by a creator deity or a larger pantheon.

15.5. ESOTERIC COSMOLOGY

Esoteric is from the Greek εσοτερικος (esoterikos) meaning “belonging to an inner circle”. Hence,

esoteric cosmology is cosmology that is an intrinsic part of an esoteric or occult system of thought.

Esoteric cosmology maps out the universe with planes of existence and consciousness according

to a specific worldview usually from a doctrine

15.6. METAPHYSICAL COSMOLOGY

Metaphysical Cosmology is an area of philosophy that deals with our place in the universe and the

nature of reality beyond its physicality, including understanding and explaining why everything

came to be. Metaphysics seeks answers beyond measurable matter, energy, space, and time and

explores the mysteries and meanings of all that exists. It can include speculation about what type

of god might exist. In metaphysics, it often involves questions of how a god operates and how a

god might have created the universe. (spiritwalkministry.com). historically, it has had quite a broad

scope, and in many cases was founded in religion. The ancient Greeks did not draw a distinction

between this use and their model for the cosmos. However, in modern use it addresses questions

about the Universe which are beyond the scope of science.

15.7. AIMS OF COSMOLOGY

53

x Centered on the problems of accounting for the distance between this world and the

beyond

x Or the evil nature of this world and its gods.

15.8. PRROBLEMS OF COSMOLOGY

Cosmology, as most philosophers understand it, has a threefold problem to solve:

• What is the origin of the universe? What is the first cause? Is it existence necessary?

• What is the ultimate component of the universe?

• What is the ultimate reason for the existence of the universe? Does the cosmos have a

Purpose?

15.9. WHENCE THE UNIVERSE

What is the first cause of the material universe? Where did it come from?

So people tried to solve the question by developing different theories like creationism,

Immanent Emanation theory, Transitive Emanation theory, etc.

Creationism is the belief that the universe and the various forms of life were created by God out

of nothing (ex nihilo). It is a response to modern evolutionary theory, which explains the

emergence and diversity of life without recourse to the doctrine of God or any other divine power.

15.10. THE CONSTITUENT CAUSE OF THE UNIVERSE

What is made up of this corporal world? What is made of this material world?

Also there were note promising to solve this delicate problem. They are, Greek Atomism

Mechanism, hylomorphism, dynamic atomism and dynamism proper

54

Mechanism, one of these theories that seeks, to solve the second problem is what this piece would

throw light on. The world mechanism from its Greek word Μηχανισμος means a natural or

established process by which something takes place or is brought about

Greek Atomism

The main argument of the mechanical theory is that the constituent matter of all corporeal beings

is the same and uniform. Proponents of this theory are basically materialists who argue that the

true elements of the natural world are tiny, indivisible, and microscopic bodies called “atoms”.

They also claim that matter and motion are enough to explain all the cosmic phenomena. They

also see all forces as simple local motion hence their uniform perspective of all substances. There

are two types of atomism. While one is chemically tuned, the other is philosophical. These two

aspects will be further explained later.

Hylomorphism; a theory or doctrine that states that two elements are necessary in the constitution

of physical mobile beings, which are matter and form; been the constituent cause of the world. The

term stems from two Greek words: ύλη (hylê)—“matter” and μορφη (morphê)—“form”. So

simply put it is a matter and form theory (Doe, 2016).

It was the central doctrine of Aristotle’s Philosophy of Nature specifically in his Treatises on

Physics. He famously contended that every physical natural object is a compound of two intrinsic

principles: “matter and form” (Doe, 2016).

Matter has one fundamental meaning with two implications: primary (prime) and secondary

matter. Primary (prime) matter means the basic stuff out of which a bodily being is made and

matter in secondary sense means an actual existing body (Glenn, 1959).

15.11. THE FINAL CAUSE OF THE MATERIAL UNIVERSE

55

The last problem that cosmology attempt to solve is that of the final cause. Does the world

have a purpose? Materialist like Hackel and Buchner will say the world has no purpose.

But the theist will disagree because they believe in a personal God and that the end manifest

the glory of creator.

Aristotle’s four causes theory uphold that, all the causes can be grouped into various divisions.

The four causes are based on general laws, and these causes are associated with the question of

why a thing is. To answer such question, is to give a cause. Any artefact can be broken down to

these four causes. These are the Material Cause, Formal Cause, Efficient Cause and the Final

Cause.

16. METAPHYSICS

16.0. INTRODUCTION

The term Metaphysics in itself appears first in the late antiquity names the investigation of the

ultimate principles, causes origins constituents and categories of all things. The term Metaphysics

has been seen in three different approaches thus etymological, the big picture and the definition-

by-example. Aside these three various approaches there is also the traditional definition. Let us

now consider the approaches one after the other to see how they tried to define the term

Metaphysics.

16.1. DEFINITION OF METAPHYSICS

16.2. ETYMOLOGICAL APPROACH

The Etymological approach; according to this approach, metaphysics comes from the two Greek

word Meta=after and Phusica=natural things. The word metaphysics is derived from a collective

title of fourteen books of Aristotle. He himself did not know the word: for him, the subject matter

of metaphysics has four names thus first philosophy, first science, wisdom and theology. After the

death of Aristotle, Andronicus of Rhodes edited his work and titled those fourteen books ‘’Ta Meta

ta phusica – the after the physical. Andronicus is therefore attributed with gathering the group of

work predominantly on nature and publishing them as the physics. The following collection batch

after the publication of the physics he literally called Ta Mata-ta-phusica meaning the word

56

published after the physics. The books incidentally contained certain philosophical discussing such

as existence, potentiality, form, substance, identity, time, change, universals, actuality, matter and

causation.

Etymologically then, one can say that Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy which is concerned

with the collection of topics associated with the particular collection of Aristotle’s writings that

we published after the physics. The physics contained strictly discussion on things related to

nature, then if that content of metaphysics is also strictly about things beyond nature, then we will

say that this approach would give a satisfying account to metaphysics. In any case the etymology

does not come out with the important component of the discipline. Therefore, the big picture

approach.

16.3. BIG PICTURE APPROACH

The big picture approach; this defined metaphysics as the branch of philosophy concerned with

fundamental questions about the reality of nature. However, this definition raises some difficult

issues thus; in bringing out that which concerned with reality: some disciplines of inquiry such as

biology, economics and history also deals with reality, but since we are talking about philosophy

then one would also know that reality based field like biology are not branch of philosophy.

16.4. CONSTRUCTIVE APPROACH

The constructive approach, comparing the assumption in the big picture approach, then this will

leave us with the problem of distinguishing metaphysics from other branches of philosophy which

are also reality based like ethics and epistemology are branches of philosophy and are concerned

with reality. However, are distinct from metaphysics. Since we now know what philosophy is, we

can understand the big picture approach. In other to defined metaphysics let’s consider the

following;

Ethics is a branch of philosophy concerned with fundamental questions about right and wrong,

good and bad.

Epistemology is a branch of philosophy concerned with fundamental questions about knowledge

and justification.

57

Metaphysics is the other main branch of philosophy, meaning that which is left when one subtracts

ethics and epistemology from the core area of philosophy.

16.5. DEFINITION BY EXAMPLE

The third one is the definition by example approach, it states that metaphysics is the branch of

philosophy concerned with reality which depicts in the following; ontology (study of being), the

nature of time, the mind body problem, the nature of the laws of nature etc.

16.6. TRADITIONAL DEFINITION

Now let us consider the traditional definition: metaphysics is a branch of philosophy concerned

with reality, it has traditionally been defined as the science of being which means the science of

all beings considering simply as beings, it is the science of being qua being. The traditional

definition spells out these various objects of metaphysics.

1. The material object: the material object of metaphysics is all beings example substance,

accident, God, possible being and being of reason.

x Substance: that which does not depend on another subject but by itself

x Accident: is that which depend on another thing.

x God: metaphysics deals with God as a common cause of being. God is the material

object of greatest excellent in metaphysics. He is the subject of highest dignity.

x Possible being: metaphysics deals with this as that which has a relation to being existing

in reality.

x Being of reason: this is also an object of metaphysics which is a being but not as that

which exist in reality but a being which exist in the mind.

2. Formal object quod: this object of metaphysics is being as being. It is a being common to the

ten predicates: substance and the nine accidents

3. Formal object quo: this is the positive immateriality of being which abstract from all matter.

58

16.7. CONCLUSION

We have looked at the history and the term Metaphysics and have also identified three different

approaches in characterising metaphysics thus: Etymological, Big-picture and the definition by-

example.

Finally, we also looked at the traditional definition of metaphysics which actually gave as a broad

idea about what metaphysics entails.

17. EPISTEMOLOGY

17.0. INTRODUCTION

Epistemology comes from the two Greek words “episteme” and “logos”, which means knowledge

and discourse/ study respectively. Epistemology is therefore a branch of philosophy that studies

the nature, origin, and the limits of human knowledge and tries to fashion a definition for

knowledge. There are some questions that epistemology attempts to answer. This are:

1. What is knowledge?

2. What is the extent of our knowledge?

3. What are the sources of knowledge?

4. Is there genuine knowledge?

5. What is justified true belief? And so on and so forth.

17.1. HISTORY OF EPISTEMOLOGY

Again we looked at the history of epistemology, how it has been developed over the years.

Some of the ancient Greek philosophers tried to tease out some properties and nature of reality.

Heraclitus will posit the notion that change is constant, however Parmenides also held a contra

view that, reality could not change for if Beings were to change they will become non Beings and

that is absurd. That generated two school of philosophical thought sophism and skepticism.

Moreover, some such as Plato and Aristotle were also of the view that our mind to attain truth or

59

certitude. However we cannot rely on our sense for certain knowledge or universal ideas, for us to

attain universal ideas we have to use our intellect to go beyond the information given to us by our

senses. The question is, is this universal ideas the product of our ideas or not?

17.2. TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE

Furthermore we looked at knowledge, we learnt that there are three types of knowledge. These

are;

1. Personal knowledge or knowledge by acquaintance

2. Procedural knowledge(knowledge of how to do something)

3. Propositional knowledge (knowledge of fact meaning knowing that).

Epistemology is interested in propositional knowledge because it is based on truth dimension.

17.3. TRIPARTITE THEORY

This introduced us to what knowledge entails. We learnt that knowledge according to the tripartite

or traditional definition is justified true belief.

This is presented as; X knows that P, IFF

1. X believes that p

2. It is true that p

3. X is justified in believing that P.

These three together are sufficient conditions for one to attain knowledge. But the individual

condition is necessary condition for the attainment of knowledge.

17.4. GETTIER PROBLEM

Again, Edmund Gettier levelled a criticism against the traditional definition of knowledge. He

said, sometimes all the traditional conditions of knowledge will be fulfilled, jet one cannot have

genuine knowledge because that knowledge is centered on coincidence.

60

17.5. THEORIES OF TRUTH

We also looked at the theories of truth, here we learnt that, basically there are three theories of

truth. These are;

1. Correspondence theory of truth. This theory informed us that truth is correspondence with

or in agreement with reality.

2. Coherence theory of truth, which states that a statement is true IFF it coheres with all true

statements.

3. Pragmatist theory of truth. This theory states that a statement is true IFF it has a

consequences that is useful, workable and satisfactory.

17.6. SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE

Lastly but the least, we learnt about the origin or source of knowledge, with this we learnt that we

use our senses, memory, testimonies and reasoning in the process of acquiring knowledge and

based on that many theories have been propounded regarding the use of these instruments to obtain

knowledge. Some of these are: rationalism, empiricism, reliabilism, coherentism, foundationalism

and naturalism.

17.7. THEORIES OF KNOWLEDGE

17.8. SPINOZA

Spinoza who is a rationalist. He distinguished three levels of knowledge, these are; opinion or

imagination, ratio or reason and Intuitive knowledge.

17.9. JOHN LOCKE

Then John Locke who is an empiricist and is commonly known to has said that all knowledge

comes from experience and the brain of human being was ‘Tabula rasa’ that is he has no knowledge

initial but through experience man has gain knowledge. He also categorized knowledge in three

types, namely Intuitive, Demonstrative and Sensitive knowledge.

17.10. LEIBNIZ

61

Better still Leibniz will also posit the notion that all truth is necessary truth given that the subject

predicate propositions are fundamental and that all knowledge is a priori. He then concluded that

if a proposition is a necessary truth, then it is a priori knowable.

In conclusion, this is what we did in the last academic year concerning epistemology.

18. PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

18.0. INTRODUCTION

Philosophy comes from the two Greek words “philos” and “sophia” meaning “love” and “wisdom”

respectively. Thus, philosophy can simply be defined as the love or pursuit of wisdom. Religion

comes from the Latin word “Religare” meaning “to bind”. Religion is understood from two

perspectives thus the functionalists’ perspective and the substantive perspective. The former

pertains to the belief systems of religion and the latter pertains to the practicality of the belief

systems of religion. Therefore, religion can be defined as a set of beliefs and practices of an

individual or groups that gear towards an ultimate reality. In most religious groups there are

features like a believe in a supernatural, distinction between sacred and profane, ethical principles

to guide it followers and the promise of inner peace and harmony despite the challenges of life.

And religion function as a means to close the gap between hope and reality, it rationalizes social,

economic and functional inequalities and it also creates virtues out of social necessity by

encouraging individuals to offer sacrifices and surrender their ego.

Philosophy of Religion attempts to analyze and critically evaluate religious beliefs. Its primary

concern is the truth of religious claims, the acceptability of religious values and other such

innovative aspects. Broadly speaking, philosophy of religion gathers and assembles information

which involves the psychological and historical study of religious life and interprets the material

gathered systematically in order to bring out its meaning.

18.1. AIM OF THE COURSE

The aim of this course is to help students or seminarians to analyze and describe the frame of

philosophy of religion in the world, acquire the effort to defend or attack various religious positions

in terms of philosophy and lastly, to analyze religious language.

62

18.2. FAITH AND REASON

In Philosophy of Religion truth is ascertained basically from three perspectives thus through faith,

strong rationalism and critical rationalism. Those who opine that truth is ascertained through faith

are called fideists and those who opine that truth is attained by pure reasoning are called

rationalists.

Fideism is a philosophical view which exhorts theological faith by making it the ultimate criterion

of truth. There are two groups of fideists: Strict Fideist Moderate Fideist

Strict Fideists are those who assign no place to reason in discovering and understanding

fundamental tenets of religion. Examples of those who are strict fideists are Tertullian, Martin

Luther, Peter and Damian while Moderate fideists on the other hand, generally accept that some

truth, at least can be known by reason subsequently reinforce and clarified. For them, reason can

or must play a role in the search for religious truth. This stand affirms that reason can in some

cases partially comprehend religious truth after they have been revealed. Examples of those who

are moderate fideists are Blaise Paschal and Thomas Aquinas.

The second means of attaining the truth is through Strong Rationalism. Strong Rationalism holds

that in order for a religious belief-system to be properly and rationally accepted, it must be possible

to prove that the belief-system is true.

And the third means of attaining the truth is through Critical Rationalism. Critical Rationalism is

the view that religious belief systems can and must be rationally criticized and evaluated, although

conclusive proof of such a system is impossible.

18.3. G. W. F. HEGEL

According to George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, religion and philosophy have the same object that

thus the truth. He sees man as a finite being and God as an infinite being, and that there is a gap

between man and God which can be only closed by religion through the practice of love, and that

God reveals himself to us through manifestation in nature and human lives.

18.4. FEUERBACH

63

According to Ludwle Andreas Feuerbach a philosopher who lived from (1804-1872), religion is

the expression of feelings and imaginations. He says God is simply the projection of man’s own

qualities. He says during the religious early stage man’s failure made him to ascribe his

unattainable qualities by then to God, and so for him God is nothing than man’s projection so God

does not exist and so man has to rationalize religion and God, and liberate himself from Him.

18.5. KARL MARX

According to Karl Marx a philosopher who lived from (1818-1883), reason is a field where God

does not exist thus when man subject religion to reason. He said it is man that has given a value to

God but when we do proper reflection we will see God as nothing but like a mere paper money we

have given value to. He says religion obscures reality, it anaesthetizes the will and also blocks the

transformation of reality. And he adds that religion is indeed “the opium of the masses”

19. AFRICAN PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHTS

19.0. Introduction.

African Philosophical Thought is a philosophical study designed to Provide Seminarians with

basic background knowledge of Africa, its people and cultures, to enable them to examine the

metaphysical, epistemological and axiological views of their own ethnic origin and some other

ethnic groups in Ghana and Africa, that they may come to an understanding of the people they are

to minister to, and why they behave the way they do. The course therefore seeks to answer two

basic questions; What is an African and Who is an African?

19.1. What is an African?

What an African is, has to do with the Geography and History of the African. It gives a description

of the African, his location on the globe, his historical origin and the genesis of his current position

(in which colonialism is believed to have a very important part). In this course therefore, an African

is believed to be a person, especially of the nigroid (black) race, from the indigenous ethnic groups

found on the continent of Africa and people who trace their ancestry to these groups in the African

Diaspora.

64

19.2. Who is an African?

Who is an African has to do with the philosophical thoughts of Africans. It describes the behavior

of Africans and why they behave the way they do, what they believed in, and the values they hold

and live for. Here we consider the Metaphysical, Epistemological and Axiological view of the

African people.

19.3. African Metaphysical thoughts.

This has to do with the totality of African’s perception of reality, being and nature of the universe.

It involves Ontology which has to do with reality, being, personality, substance and nature of God,

and Cosmology which concerns the nature of the universe. For Africans, Reality is seen as one

whiles remaining two. That is “Unity in Duality”. Being (the whole range of, existent things) form

an intricate part of reality. The concept of one whiles remaining two is based on the Female-Male

paradigm. Reality and being is based on opposites. African ontology therefore postulate that the

world is based on the interactions of two opposition sides that complement each other. The African

thus says Man and Woman, not Man or Woman; Day and Night, not Day or Night; Life and Death

not Life or Death. The world is divided into two- Phenomenal world and Nominal. Visible and

invisible participations. The visible sphere is inhabited by human beings (good and bad people),

animals, and other material beings. The invisible sphere is believed to be inhabited by the Supreme

Deity or creator, lesser deities, Spirits (good and evil) and the ancestors. The operation of our

world is believed to be based the interplay of the forces of good and evil and so for African, nothing

happens by chance. Therefore for most Africans life outside the horizon of the divine is

unimaginable and risky.

19.4. African Epistemological Thought.

African epistemology is the African theory of knowledge which includes: African conception of

the nature of knowledge, Means used to acquire knowledge, Criteria for the assessment of the

validity of knowledge. On the nature of knowledge, Africans believe there are varied forms of

knowledge, including; Perceptual knowledge- gained through sense perception, Common sense

knowledge - that distinguishes between what is morally good or morally bad, Old age knowledge,

Inferential knowledge - drawing conclusion from a given fact of data, Mystical knowledge -

through the help of the gods and other spiritual beings and Oral tradition. On the sources of

65

knowledge, we have Material sources such as Emblems of worship, craft paintings, etc. and non-

material sources such as Myths, Liturgies, among others. For the African, for knowledge to be

valid, it must be Consistent, it must Correspondence with reality, and must Cohere with already

existing systems.

19.5. African Axiological Thought.

Axiology is the branch of philosophy that is concerned with various criteria, which underline the

choices we make and do not make. It is divided into two components; Ethics which concerns what

is right and ought to be done and what is wrong and ought not to be done, and Aesthetics which

has to do with appreciation of beauty in nature and art. Africans recognize God as the source of

ethics, and so religion plays a very important role in African societies, such that Ethical

prescriptions are perceived a divine injunctions and penalties emanating from God. Their ethics is

being guided by the principle of being your brother/sister's keeper (one for all and all for one).

19.6. Conclusion.

African philosophical thought brings to an awareness of the fact that people do not just act, but

their actions are influenced by certain believes they hold on to. Certain practices of the African

people, for instance, widowhood rite among the people of Ghana, obviously stem from some of

these beliefs they hold dear and would die for.