Helen Lauer in her monograph x-rayed the
intention, scholars in Africa ought to be battling with and her intention
is nothing but the call for a critical self-appraisal and deeper understanding of our cultural heritage and traits. She makes her intention clear from the outset on the aim and objective of her work, which is the dichotomy between tradition and modernity, and how it has developed and still develops into a variety of practical as well as discursive controls on the reasonableness and admissibility of expressed thought about contemporary “non-accidental cultures”.
In her analysis and explications on purposely, African past and present, she claims that the title of her monograph is not problematic since they could be taken at face value in order to denote correctly their implied meanings. This, she explains that they are two ways of life and existence of which are rooted in different histories and economies. It would be of no use and thereby being a futile exercise to write this volume as she says that if the hypostasising of historical and practical tensions did not inhibit Africans’ “deepest aspirations” for self-understanding and self-realisation. P. 7. This really signifies and identifies the effect of dichotomy in the sense that it inhibits
individual’s ability to rigorously and critically assess the relative values of different social customs to which (s)he has been exposed – there would be distortion of experience and values.
To her, and for Africa to develop, there must be a growth from a stage of relative weakness and dependency to a later stage of relative strength and autonomy. At this stage, the need for transformation from tradition and the development of analytic and liberal reasoning in Africa. She recommends the extension of African predicaments in all facets of human endeavours and the ability to recognize the effectiveness of empirical facts to replace out-moded ideological agenda. Even, the –development of European societies was really part of the breakaway of power from the “Vatican City” of Church authority to humanism. There are stages and facets of important social function of science in technocratic societies because science defies other sources of establishment of credibility.
The endurance of Africa from the colonised era to the neo-colonialism has been a major stumbling block for development and this has made it impossible that no individual; can be in a position to compare and appraise two versions of what is correct with the option to synthesise aspects of each because there is impediment to the appraisal of one’s culture. This is so glaring because the depiction from outside must be inaccurate just for the reason that any form of rationality has to be judged in its own terms quoting Dipo Irele on his “Essentially Contested Concepts and the question of Rationality in Traditional African Thought”. The whole problem Africa is getting herself muddled up is her exposition from the outset to western ideologies and it may be difficult to change one’s viewpoints in such a way that all experience is evaluated differently from the contact to the western civilisation on individual. It is not easy for Africans to conceptually and practically decolonise themselves from the harsh grips of the western world. It would still be difficult also to really grow in Africa and do decolonisation because one cannot take a stand and evaluate from ’outside’ the very same worldview that one lives ‘inside’. P.21.
The issue of rationality that has been a consistent criterion in demarcating less-developed societies to advanced ones came into fore. She is of the opinion that individuals can
rationally judge any belief if (s)he can rationally judge even one by his cultural lights. I think she is making a mistake of concluding in this manner. For the fact that one can judge rationally one idea does not suppose that such individual would be able to judge other things. Although, the essence of learning is to, according to her in p.24 incorporates beliefs from other worldviews into your own and to revise your previous beliefs, which may amount to the same thing. It is through the process of learning that individual has a way of sifting different dimensions of knowledge one has been able to imbibe. This helps in our rational development and acquisition and not through individual judgement on the look of things.All the above questions point to the fact that Africa is yet to be free from the grips of these alienators. What we are suffering and passing through today are the handiworks of the westerners. It was Europe that underdeveloped Africa as Walter Rodney says. What she is doing in her monograph is not different from the writings of Strauss, Bruhl, Hume, Kant and other scholars on their biased notions about the black world. These foreigners should leave us alone. Why Africans that are making ways not dictating for them? An instance is the issue of war against terrorism! Why are Africans not leading the war against terrorism just because of 9/11 strike? If we are not should away from and leave us to think for ourselves. doing that, they