A Tactical Recap to the Fermented Ph.D. Dump

Dump I | Dump II | Dump III | Dump IV | Dump V | Dump VI/Africa I | Dump VII/Africa II | Dump VIII/Africa III | Dump IX/Africa IV | Dump X/Africa V | Dump XI/Africa VI | Dump XII/Africa VII | Dump XIII/Africa VIII | Dump XIV/Africa IX

---

In the previous dump, I discussed the important tenets of intercultural philosophy that we need to accept and maintain to dehegemonize philosophy, especially Western philosophy. In this post, using the previous one as a point of departure, I want to introduce the idea or notion of comparative philosophy. I will do this via the introduction of some core ideas developed by a Nigerian philosopher, Sophie Oluwole, when she compared to figures in ancient Greek and Nigerian philosophy, respectively, Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà. The book, Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà: Two Patron Saints of Classical Philosophy, has since its publication has been hard to find because, amongst other reasons, modern academia has questioned its worth. But the book is a wonderful read if you can find it! In this post, I will try to sum up its core ideas.

Why Comparison?

Comparative philosophy is a relatively obscure field in philosophy. That is, not a lot of attention is given to it. However, it is a very important field in philosophy. That is because as our global society tends towards ever-increasing sameness, differences can become moralized or hegemonized. Difference is not viewed as difference as such but differences in a framework of hierarchies that reinforce the status quo and so on. In short, because someone does not, for example, act in the way that the status quo group acts, he/she is already envisioned as being lesser.

Comparative philosophy rejects this notion, it also latches onto the important intercultural philosophical tenets as discussed in the previous post. But still, the question is why compare? Is the act of comparison not already in a moralized framework, moralized meaning already relying on notions of "good" and "bad"? I do not think so.

The act of comparison is to find differences and similarities. If one does this in a framework in which there are already in-grained morals of good and bad, this might be a problem. However, as noted differences for intercultural philosophers and comparative philosophers are just that, differences. They are not good or bad. Comparison is a good way of setting different philosophies against each other. Philosophers might use various methods to do these comparisons and this is where problems might showcase (which I will discuss in the next Ph.D. dump).

Comparing Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà

Nigerian philosopher Sophie Oluwole takes her point of departure as setting up a framework in which she compares two, what she calls, patron saints of philosophy, Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà. In her magnum opus of a kind, Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà: Two Patron Saints of Classical Philosophy, she compares these two philosophers and their philosophies by finding differences and similarities between them.

Finding Similarities

In digging into the philosophies of Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà, she finds them to have similarities regarding their way of expression; both, for example, used metaphorical language in dialogue form to express themselves. And both declared that absolute knowledge was something reserved for the gods; humans will only ever have partial knowledge. Hence, Socratic ignorance, or epistemic humility. Their philosophies both might be read as studies into the nature of leading a good life.

Finding Differences

Interestingly enough, Sophie Oluwole finds that Ọ̀rúnmìlà held the notion that women were equal to men and that only fools would see differences between the sexes as something bad. She writes that Ọ̀rúnmìlà said that:

“The elephant, has been roving for several years without being hit by the javelin. The buffalo wandered for many months and did not slip into a ditch. It is only a person who fails to appreciate human beings and that is not well learned that would say a woman is socially insignificant. It is from heaven that Ọsun, was bedecked with gold and silver. Anyone who respects her will be blessed with money, wives, children and long life. Therefore, do not abuse women because of their sexual peculiarities.” (Oluwole, 2017:72)

Another difference was that Socrates, for example, held that good and bad actions were things in themselves, Ọ̀rúnmìlà held that they were inseparable pairs. The one always presupposes the other and vice versa. And more importantly, Ọ̀rúnmìlà held that humans were all equal; Socrates according to Sophie Oluwole still held the notion that inequality of some sort is needed in society.

What Happens Now?

In some sense, the comparison leads to the notion that Socrates is not the only monolithic philosopher. Or, more specifically, Socrates and Greek philosophy is not a monolithic idea or creation that Western philosophy has imposed onto them. There are other philosophies that are similar to Greek philosophy, and Greek philosophers, like Ọ̀rúnmìlà. But there are also important differences which one might tentatively state, for example, Ọ̀rúnmìlà was better than Socrates. However, this is problematic as one set out to compare these philosophers in a framework that does not allow for these hegemonic/hierarchical readings. In the next post, I will begin to problematize this idea more.

For now, the most important takeaway from the work of comparative philosophers such as Sophie Oluwole is that we find philosophers from different regions to be doing similar work as, for example, Greek philosophers. Reason is not endowed to specific people, but it is a universal trait. Therefore, the idea that when we compare different philosophies and philosophers we might end up with a richer and more complete idea of philosophy rather than presuppose that philosophy, for example, emerged only with the Greeks.

Postscriptum, or It Was Comparison All Along

In some sense, we as philosophers are always comparing different philosophies. That is the basic idea behind writing, for example, a philosophy paper: you compare two philosophies in order to write about your own. But this presupposes or relies on a different type of framework. Comparative philosophy relies on the framework that presupposes that differences and similarities will lead toward a richer and denser idea of philosophy and not one that will lead to the critique of ideas.

In any case, I hope you enjoyed this post, and at least learned something! The ideas and content of this post are my own, that is, it is my reading of for example Sophie Oluwole. (See her book here from which I quoted: Socrates and Ọ̀rúnmìlà: Two Patron Saints of Classical Philosophy. I have the 2017 edition.) The photographs are also my own, taken with my iPhone. Happy learning, stay safe!