(B) AFRICAN ETHICS/APPLIED ETHICS
Ramose finds Shutte’s exposition of Ubuntu problematical on
methodological (±10), semantic (±10) and historical (±10) grounds.
Ethics
A science of morality; study of the meaning of good & bad with reference to human behavior
2 interpretations of ethics:
1. Focus upon human moral behavior as it manifests itself in practice
2. Ethics as a philosophy focused upon the specific principles underlying particular moral behavior and a
justification of those principles.
The ethics of Ubuntu can stand on its own and has done so in the past;
Ethics of Ubuntu cannot be reduced to one essence
Yet; SHUTTE’s exposition of the Ubuntu ethic is an attempt to reduce the ethics of Ubuntu to
one essence, namely, the community.
Using body imagery & random selections to identify the essence of Ubuntu ethics:
Combining:
o the idea of; European freedom & individuals with the power of free choice
o the African idea of community & the person depending on other persons to be persons.
To construct an ethic of Ubuntu that is true to the African tradition, but which can also be applies
to the new European world
His exposition is problematic on three grounds:
1. METHODOLOGICAL
Cannot claim Ubuntu to be dissolved by a stranger & created into something new; it is an independent
entity before Shutter came into contact with it & cannot be changed into something that it is not.
shutter considers Ubuntu ethics from the point of view of a stranger;
from a European point of view
the distance between him & Ubuntu is his platform of experience (European experience) and this an
epistemological paradigm; the fact that European & African traditions differ.
Thus his methodology entails:
a. Universality
That the insights of Ubuntu ethics are not African; but can be seen universally; due to the humanity aspect.
b. Creating not critiquing
Not wanting to give an exposition on Ubuntu ethics; rather to use its insight creatively; dissolving the
characteristics of Ubuntu into abstract universality
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
o Dissolving the characteristics denies the unique nature of Ubuntu; highlighting the fact that he is trying
to create something from Ubuntu as something out of nothing
o If he is creating as a stranger; then it means that Ubuntu has stood independently of him.
o THUS UBUNTU EXISTS AS SOMETHING, NOT NOTHING.
,He cannot thus claim to be creating out of nothing, because Ubuntu can stand independently, he is
henceforth trying to CHANGE UBUNTU INTO SOMETHING THAT IT WAS NOT.
2. SEMNATICALLY
Semantics: meaning, logicality; flawed exposition of the ethics of Ubuntu as humanity
Shutter claims that Ubuntu means humanity
This thesis is questionable; due to the fact that humanity is abstract & differs conceptually.
The universality element that Shutter applies to Ubuntu implies a dynamic, changing, temporality.
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
Problematic to accept that Ubuntu mean humanity, due to the inconsistency with philosophical perspectives.
And the fact that it cannot be resolved – alludes the flawed nature of his exposition of the ethics of Ubuntu.
3. HISTORICALLY
Does not show appropriate appreciation for the historical roots of Ubuntu in Southern African culture.
Not appreciating the meaning of history from the point of view of the culture of most
Southern Africans.
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
a. Lack of appreciation; not justifying the occurrences if Southern Africa – colonial dictation & the
circumstances in SA. Denying the unjustified violence of colonialism & the right to conquest on
ethical & political grounds.
b. South Africa as a virgin territory open for occupation by anyone; highlighting his faithful & uncritical
view of the dogma of the history in SA according to the conqueror.
c. HE FAILS TO PROBLEMATIZE THE VIOLENCE OF COLONIALISM & reaffirms the dogma of the history
the history in SA according to the conqueror.
CONCLUSION
Shutter is invoking Ubuntu in light of his ethical insensitivity is to undermine the philosophy as well as the
ethics of Ubuntu.
Shutter’s undertaking to odder an ethic of Ubuntu is fundamentally flawed philosophically, historically
& ethically.
, Be able to explain Ubuntu and discuss its strengths and weaknesses (50).
Remember that some of its strengths can be found in the field of Applied Ethics (in fact, Ubuntu’s
strengths relative to Western ethical theories could in itself be the topic of an interesting Bioethical
discussion for ±25 marks).
UBUNTU; I AM, BECAUSE WE ARE
FRIENDLY RELATIONS ARE IMPERATIVE; a person is a person, through other persons
“A person is a person through other persons”
(“A person is a person…”): (“…through other persons”):
The ultimate goal of a person (i.e. a self or human) One becomes a full person through communal,
in the biological sense should be to become a full harmonious or, in short, friendly relationships (cf.
person (i.e. a real self or genuine human being). to be human means to be humane).
STRENGTHS
UBUNTU deemed as an antidote for Africa’s (and even the world’s) social ailments.
Friendly relationships:
Identity: WE Solidarity: CONPASSION
To identify with others means to think of yourself To exhibit solidarity towards others means to be
and them as a “we” or as members of the same compassionate
group (caring, sharing, respect, warmth, empathy)
(i.e. to share a sense of self with them) and to
cooperate with them (i.e. to work towards the
same ends).
WEAKNESSESS: CONTROVERIES
DOES UBUNTU EXIST?
Focus on examples of caring and sharing:
o Ubuntu as important myth
o Ubuntu as ethical ideal
o Ubuntu as philosophical construct
A) BIPOLAR THINKING
Thinking that sets Africa (the one pole) up against the West (the other pole).
Ubuntu vs Kantianism & utilitarianism
Seeking freedom from past & present represented by western oppression & neocolonialism.
Seeking the idea of an African concept in Africa
B) COMMUNITY & EXCLUSIVITY
Specifically, the aspect of SOLIDARITY & IDENTITY
The intense traditions that are followed to ensure solidarity & solidify identity:
In unifying the community, it can also cause isolation to those who do not partake.
TRADITION NECESSARY TO REACH SOLIDARITY & EXCLUSIVITY – you’ll be an outsider & not in unison
Ramose finds Shutte’s exposition of Ubuntu problematical on
methodological (±10), semantic (±10) and historical (±10) grounds.
Ethics
A science of morality; study of the meaning of good & bad with reference to human behavior
2 interpretations of ethics:
1. Focus upon human moral behavior as it manifests itself in practice
2. Ethics as a philosophy focused upon the specific principles underlying particular moral behavior and a
justification of those principles.
The ethics of Ubuntu can stand on its own and has done so in the past;
Ethics of Ubuntu cannot be reduced to one essence
Yet; SHUTTE’s exposition of the Ubuntu ethic is an attempt to reduce the ethics of Ubuntu to
one essence, namely, the community.
Using body imagery & random selections to identify the essence of Ubuntu ethics:
Combining:
o the idea of; European freedom & individuals with the power of free choice
o the African idea of community & the person depending on other persons to be persons.
To construct an ethic of Ubuntu that is true to the African tradition, but which can also be applies
to the new European world
His exposition is problematic on three grounds:
1. METHODOLOGICAL
Cannot claim Ubuntu to be dissolved by a stranger & created into something new; it is an independent
entity before Shutter came into contact with it & cannot be changed into something that it is not.
shutter considers Ubuntu ethics from the point of view of a stranger;
from a European point of view
the distance between him & Ubuntu is his platform of experience (European experience) and this an
epistemological paradigm; the fact that European & African traditions differ.
Thus his methodology entails:
a. Universality
That the insights of Ubuntu ethics are not African; but can be seen universally; due to the humanity aspect.
b. Creating not critiquing
Not wanting to give an exposition on Ubuntu ethics; rather to use its insight creatively; dissolving the
characteristics of Ubuntu into abstract universality
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
o Dissolving the characteristics denies the unique nature of Ubuntu; highlighting the fact that he is trying
to create something from Ubuntu as something out of nothing
o If he is creating as a stranger; then it means that Ubuntu has stood independently of him.
o THUS UBUNTU EXISTS AS SOMETHING, NOT NOTHING.
,He cannot thus claim to be creating out of nothing, because Ubuntu can stand independently, he is
henceforth trying to CHANGE UBUNTU INTO SOMETHING THAT IT WAS NOT.
2. SEMNATICALLY
Semantics: meaning, logicality; flawed exposition of the ethics of Ubuntu as humanity
Shutter claims that Ubuntu means humanity
This thesis is questionable; due to the fact that humanity is abstract & differs conceptually.
The universality element that Shutter applies to Ubuntu implies a dynamic, changing, temporality.
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
Problematic to accept that Ubuntu mean humanity, due to the inconsistency with philosophical perspectives.
And the fact that it cannot be resolved – alludes the flawed nature of his exposition of the ethics of Ubuntu.
3. HISTORICALLY
Does not show appropriate appreciation for the historical roots of Ubuntu in Southern African culture.
Not appreciating the meaning of history from the point of view of the culture of most
Southern Africans.
RAMOSE’S CRITICISM
a. Lack of appreciation; not justifying the occurrences if Southern Africa – colonial dictation & the
circumstances in SA. Denying the unjustified violence of colonialism & the right to conquest on
ethical & political grounds.
b. South Africa as a virgin territory open for occupation by anyone; highlighting his faithful & uncritical
view of the dogma of the history in SA according to the conqueror.
c. HE FAILS TO PROBLEMATIZE THE VIOLENCE OF COLONIALISM & reaffirms the dogma of the history
the history in SA according to the conqueror.
CONCLUSION
Shutter is invoking Ubuntu in light of his ethical insensitivity is to undermine the philosophy as well as the
ethics of Ubuntu.
Shutter’s undertaking to odder an ethic of Ubuntu is fundamentally flawed philosophically, historically
& ethically.
, Be able to explain Ubuntu and discuss its strengths and weaknesses (50).
Remember that some of its strengths can be found in the field of Applied Ethics (in fact, Ubuntu’s
strengths relative to Western ethical theories could in itself be the topic of an interesting Bioethical
discussion for ±25 marks).
UBUNTU; I AM, BECAUSE WE ARE
FRIENDLY RELATIONS ARE IMPERATIVE; a person is a person, through other persons
“A person is a person through other persons”
(“A person is a person…”): (“…through other persons”):
The ultimate goal of a person (i.e. a self or human) One becomes a full person through communal,
in the biological sense should be to become a full harmonious or, in short, friendly relationships (cf.
person (i.e. a real self or genuine human being). to be human means to be humane).
STRENGTHS
UBUNTU deemed as an antidote for Africa’s (and even the world’s) social ailments.
Friendly relationships:
Identity: WE Solidarity: CONPASSION
To identify with others means to think of yourself To exhibit solidarity towards others means to be
and them as a “we” or as members of the same compassionate
group (caring, sharing, respect, warmth, empathy)
(i.e. to share a sense of self with them) and to
cooperate with them (i.e. to work towards the
same ends).
WEAKNESSESS: CONTROVERIES
DOES UBUNTU EXIST?
Focus on examples of caring and sharing:
o Ubuntu as important myth
o Ubuntu as ethical ideal
o Ubuntu as philosophical construct
A) BIPOLAR THINKING
Thinking that sets Africa (the one pole) up against the West (the other pole).
Ubuntu vs Kantianism & utilitarianism
Seeking freedom from past & present represented by western oppression & neocolonialism.
Seeking the idea of an African concept in Africa
B) COMMUNITY & EXCLUSIVITY
Specifically, the aspect of SOLIDARITY & IDENTITY
The intense traditions that are followed to ensure solidarity & solidify identity:
In unifying the community, it can also cause isolation to those who do not partake.
TRADITION NECESSARY TO REACH SOLIDARITY & EXCLUSIVITY – you’ll be an outsider & not in unison
