,PLS1502 MAY / JUNE EXAMINATION SEMESTER 2:
DUE DATE 6 OCTOBER 2026
CHOOSE ONLY TWO QUESTIONS
Question 1: Western Otherness and Biakolo’s Critique
Introduction
In “ Categories of Cross-Cultural Cognition and the African Condition ” , Peter O. Biakolo
examines the ways in which Western societies historically understood and represented
people from cultures outside the Western world. A central concept in his discussion is
“ otherness ” . Otherness refers to the process through which one group defines another
group as different, strange, inferior or fundamentally unlike itself. Biakolo argues that
Western representations of Africa and Africans were strongly influenced by this way of
thinking. Rather than viewing African societies as equal and capable of producing their own
forms of knowledge, Western thought often positioned Africa as the opposite of Europe
and used European values as the standard against which African societies were judged
(Biakolo, 1998). Biakolo is critical of this approach because it creates artificial divisions
between human beings and presents Western civilisation as the norm while portraying
African societies as deficient or backward.
The Western Concept of Otherness
The Western concept of otherness developed partly through the tendency to understand
the world by creating distinctions between “us” and “them”. In this framework, Western
societies represented themselves as modern, rational, civilised and progressive, while non-
Western societies were frequently described as traditional, irrational, primitive or uncivilised.
Biakolo explains that the African “ Other ” was therefore not simply someone who was
culturally different. Africa was constructed as an opposite to Europe. European identity was
strengthened by defining what Africa supposedly lacked. In this sense, the idea of Africa was
produced through comparison with European assumptions about civilisation and progress
(Biakolo, 1998).
, The problem with this approach is that difference becomes associated with inferiority.
Instead of recognising that societies can develop different ways of organising their political,
social and cultural lives, Western thought often placed these differences within a hierarchy.
Europe became the standard against which other societies were measured. African societies
were consequently described as lacking the characteristics that Europeans considered signs
of civilisation.
The Representation of Africa as the “Other”
This way of thinking can be seen in historical European descriptions of African societies.
European explorers, missionaries and colonial writers often interpreted African cultures
through Western categories instead of attempting to understand them according to their
own historical and cultural contexts. African religious practices, political systems and social
institutions could therefore be described as evidence of primitiveness because they did not
resemble European institutions. The problem was not simply that Europeans observed
differences between cultures. The deeper problem was that these differences were placed
within a hierarchy in which Western culture was considered superior and African culture was
positioned below it (Biakolo, 1998).
Biakolo’s argument shows that Africa was often described according to what it supposedly
lacked in comparison with Europe. African societies were therefore not always understood
on their own terms. Instead, their value was measured against Western ideas about
rationality, development, civilisation and progress. This created an incomplete and distorted
understanding of African cultures.
Western Knowledge as a Universal Standard
Biakolo is particularly critical of the assumption that Western knowledge provides a
universal standard for understanding all societies. When Western categories are treated as
universally valid, African experiences are judged according to standards that developed
within a particular historical and cultural environment. This produces a distorted
understanding of African societies (Biakolo, 1998).
For example, a political system does not necessarily become inferior simply because it
differs from European political institutions. Similarly, an African philosophical or religious
system should not automatically be regarded as irrational because it does not follow
Western philosophical or religious traditions. Different societies have developed different
ways of understanding reality and organising their communities. Cross-cultural
DUE DATE 6 OCTOBER 2026
CHOOSE ONLY TWO QUESTIONS
Question 1: Western Otherness and Biakolo’s Critique
Introduction
In “ Categories of Cross-Cultural Cognition and the African Condition ” , Peter O. Biakolo
examines the ways in which Western societies historically understood and represented
people from cultures outside the Western world. A central concept in his discussion is
“ otherness ” . Otherness refers to the process through which one group defines another
group as different, strange, inferior or fundamentally unlike itself. Biakolo argues that
Western representations of Africa and Africans were strongly influenced by this way of
thinking. Rather than viewing African societies as equal and capable of producing their own
forms of knowledge, Western thought often positioned Africa as the opposite of Europe
and used European values as the standard against which African societies were judged
(Biakolo, 1998). Biakolo is critical of this approach because it creates artificial divisions
between human beings and presents Western civilisation as the norm while portraying
African societies as deficient or backward.
The Western Concept of Otherness
The Western concept of otherness developed partly through the tendency to understand
the world by creating distinctions between “us” and “them”. In this framework, Western
societies represented themselves as modern, rational, civilised and progressive, while non-
Western societies were frequently described as traditional, irrational, primitive or uncivilised.
Biakolo explains that the African “ Other ” was therefore not simply someone who was
culturally different. Africa was constructed as an opposite to Europe. European identity was
strengthened by defining what Africa supposedly lacked. In this sense, the idea of Africa was
produced through comparison with European assumptions about civilisation and progress
(Biakolo, 1998).
, The problem with this approach is that difference becomes associated with inferiority.
Instead of recognising that societies can develop different ways of organising their political,
social and cultural lives, Western thought often placed these differences within a hierarchy.
Europe became the standard against which other societies were measured. African societies
were consequently described as lacking the characteristics that Europeans considered signs
of civilisation.
The Representation of Africa as the “Other”
This way of thinking can be seen in historical European descriptions of African societies.
European explorers, missionaries and colonial writers often interpreted African cultures
through Western categories instead of attempting to understand them according to their
own historical and cultural contexts. African religious practices, political systems and social
institutions could therefore be described as evidence of primitiveness because they did not
resemble European institutions. The problem was not simply that Europeans observed
differences between cultures. The deeper problem was that these differences were placed
within a hierarchy in which Western culture was considered superior and African culture was
positioned below it (Biakolo, 1998).
Biakolo’s argument shows that Africa was often described according to what it supposedly
lacked in comparison with Europe. African societies were therefore not always understood
on their own terms. Instead, their value was measured against Western ideas about
rationality, development, civilisation and progress. This created an incomplete and distorted
understanding of African cultures.
Western Knowledge as a Universal Standard
Biakolo is particularly critical of the assumption that Western knowledge provides a
universal standard for understanding all societies. When Western categories are treated as
universally valid, African experiences are judged according to standards that developed
within a particular historical and cultural environment. This produces a distorted
understanding of African societies (Biakolo, 1998).
For example, a political system does not necessarily become inferior simply because it
differs from European political institutions. Similarly, an African philosophical or religious
system should not automatically be regarded as irrational because it does not follow
Western philosophical or religious traditions. Different societies have developed different
ways of understanding reality and organising their communities. Cross-cultural
