A generous ontology: Identity as a process of intersubjective discovery – An African theological contribution

Abstract

The answer to the question 'who am I?' is of fundamental importance to being human. Answers to this question have traditionally been sought from various disciplines and sources, which include empirical sources, such as biology and sociology, and phenomenological sources, such as psychology and religion. Although the approaches are varied, they have the notion of foundational truth, whether from an objective or subjective perspective, in common. The question of human identity that is the subject of this paper is germinated from the title of a book by WITS academic, Ivor Chipkin, entitled, Do South Africans exist? Nationalism, democracy and the identity of 'the people ' (2007). This paper does not discuss Chipkin's thoughts on nationalism and democracy; however, it considered the matter of human identity that is raised by his question. The approach taken by this paper on the notion of identity was significantly influenced by Brian McLaren's postmodernist approach to Christian doctrine as outlined in his book A generous orthodoxy (2004) -a term coined by Yale Theologian, Hans Frei. The inadequacies of traditional approaches to human identity and consciousness that are based upon 'foundational knowledge' were thus considered. Both subjective and objective approaches to identity were touched upon, showing the weaknesses of these approaches in dealing with the complex nature of true human identity. The paper then presented an integrative framework for individual consciousness that is not static or ultimately quantifiable, but rather formulated in the process of mutual discovery that arises from a shared journey. The approach presented here drew strongly upon the groundbreaking work of Ken Wilber and Eugene de Quincey and related their ontological systems to the intersubjective approach to identity that can be found in the African philosophy and theology of 'ubuntu'. This paper focused on how the ethics and theology of this indigenous knowledge system can contribute toward overcoming the impasse of validating individual identity in contemporary academic debates on human consciousness. HTS HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies

Core aspects of ubuntu: A systematic review

“…First, some reviewed studies argue that the maxim expresses a descriptive claim (in part), which is the view that one's identity as a human being causally and even metaphysically depends on a community. Cilliers [9] and Forster, [68] for example, express the view that the aphorism articulates a factual description of humanity as a being-with-others. An individual cannot survive on his or her own, [25] but needs others.…”

“…The above descriptive claim is not common to all reviewed studies. What is commonly accepted is the view that the maxim umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu expresses a moral principle that prescribes that one ought to exhibit certain characteristics: [21,25,42,[68][69][70][71] to prize harmonious/communal or interdependent relationships; [10,57,72] to develop one's personhood through our availability to or affirmation of others; [1] to develop one's humanness through communion with others (or by being a being-with-others); and to live for others or seek goals which do not put others and the community in jeopardy. [73][74][75] In addition, this review also shows that in ubuntu, the expression 'communing with others' is not limited to actual living human beings, but also involves a fundamental connectedness of all lives in the natural and spiritual environments.…”

A postfoundational ubuntu accepts the unwelcomed (by way of ‘process’ transversality)

“…On the contrary, a foundationalist identity, that is to say, a foundationally-limited category of knowledge, mistakenly presumes all individual qualities of identity 'mean the same thing to me as they do to you … [h]owever, identity is no longer a matter that is so easily verifiable' (Forster 2010b:2 of 12). This chapter's discussion of a postfoundational ubuntu considers as a question the verifiability of identity and 'personhood'.…”

“…Accepting that a relationship of true ubuntu 'overcomes, and corrects, many of the effects of radical dualism between self and other' (Forster 2010b:6 of 12), then it must surely be irrefutably counter to the indivisibility of the existentially and epistemologically conjoined ubu and ntu to place outside of its epistemological and existential boundaries even the personally and socially unwelcomed among us: brokenness and wholeness are bound together. To cleave the unity of ubuntu by exclusion of some diversity of '-ntu' is to limit ubuntu to the 'confines of the local community, group or culture' (Van Huyssteen in Loubser 2012:85).…”

“…'vertical' in Forster 2010b:7-8 of 12) but rather with the 'horizontal relationships that shape who one is. True (ubuntu) identity … is shaped through shared life in the community' (Forster 2010b:9 of 12; emphasis added). Such a relationship as defined by ubuntu is understood to be reflective of 'individual identity [that] is based upon a complex active interrelationship of beings that share a common meaning in community' (Forster 2010b:9 of 12).…”