African/Afrikan-centered Psychology

Introduction

Terra nullius! Meaning, the land belonging to nobody, and hence available for occupation by the colonial powers. This also refers to a land without history, except for the history of the colonial powers’ encounter with it. Denying that Afrika has a history of ideas, be they in relation to the mental, physical, medical, spiritual, and so on, paved the ground for the denial of the humanity of the inhabitants of Afrika and other peoples of the conquered territories. The consequences were dire: the Transatlantic Maafa (Disaster, Holocaust) and apartheid in South Afrika, being among the prime examples.

Colonial conquest set the scene for the eradication of complex, interdisciplinary knowledge, in the tradition of the Ancient Mystery System, in favor of the Eurocentric, discipline-based paradigm of knowledge. With this was also lost the sources of what would constitute the foundations of an Afrikan-based Psychology. Others are of the view, however, that the practitioners of these ancient healing arts went underground (Mutwa, 1964) or, even better, found the means to embed them in all aspects of their lives, such as in dancing, singing, and other ritualized practices. To derive psychological concepts from these sources, and to marry them with modern ideas, in the tradition of Sankofa (returning to the source to retrieve that which was lost to inform the future), requires complex intellectual tools. The existing Psychology training curriculum progressively alienates Black/Afrikan students from their historical and cultural backgrounds. As a result, these students are poorly prepared for an intellectual, theoretical, conceptual, and methodological task of this magnitude. The status quo remains. Misorientation—the social, cultural, and economic distancing of Black/Afrikan psychologists from the communities that have raised them—is one of the major challenges limiting the provision of psychological services to the vast majority of the Black population. I will refrain from interrogating the question of linguistic and conceptual incarceration here, as it has been dealt with extensively elsewhere. It also forms the basis of critique for some of the articles in this special edition.

Nsamenang (2007) argued that Psychology, as it was taught in most departments on the Afrikan continent, was an extension of what was taught in Psychology departments in the Western world. To date, nothing much has changed. Psychology continues to remain deaf to the experiences of others, whose points of view are different from its source of origin (Bulhan, 2015). Not only has colonization led to the loss of land and the exploitation of Afrika’s material and human resources; it has been accompanied by the loss of memory and an “erosion of social bonding, indigenous beliefs, values, identities, and indigenous knowledge” (Bulhan, 2015, p. 243, emphasis in original). Nyamnjoh (2012), in his publication, “Potted Plants in Greenhouses: A Critical Reflection on the Resilience of Colonial Education in Africa,” spells out this process at length. Others (Diop, 1974; Van Sertima, 1994) have produced compelling scholarly work, to date unrefuted, on how Afrika was denied its rightful place in civilization. Scholars such as Nobles (2004, 2015), Bynum (1999), and Fu-Kiau (2001) draw upon the knowledge arising from the ancient philosophical traditions of the Hapi (Nile) Valley civilizations. This not only demonstrates Afrika’s role in civilizing the world but also provides proof that it was on the Afrikan continent that Homo sapiens first experimented with the workings of the human mind, including the unconscious (umqondo ongaqwashanga). The sources that can help us to unravel the workings of the unconscious, including the art of dream interpretation, are spread across the Afrikan continent (Bynum, 1999). Piecing all of this together requires complex theoretical work and an interdisciplinary methodology (Diop, 1974; Van Sertima, 1994). Among others, Mutwa (1964), Bynum (1999), Nobles (2004, 2015), Grills (2002, 2004), and Karenga (2004) show that it is indeed possible to undertake this task. In their respective works, the above-named authors analyze the multiplicity, multivocality, and continuity of the person in Afrikan thought—the Afrikan unconscious as the foundation of the human unconscious, Sakhu/Spirit, and Ma’at (Ubu-ntu as a Moral Ideal). The task requires hard work and time. Interestingly, the work of the above-mentioned scholars is conspicuous by its absence in the Psychology curriculum, even on the Afrikan continent.

Against this background, this special edition on Afrikan Psychology is timely. This short article’s point of departure is that dispossession, be it of one’s land, memory, history, story, name, the power to imagine, and so on, comprises the subject of Afrikan Psychology. Bulhan (2015) and others have referred to this as the colonization of being. The goal of Afrikan Psychology, which in this context is used synonymously with Afrocentric or Afrikan-centered Psychology, is (1) to emancipate peoples of Afrikan ancestry from all forms of bondage, including mental and epistemic bondage, and (2) to emancipate all of humanity from its prejudices. The limited scope of this article does not afford the opportunity to expand on many of the ideas I introduce here. It is my hope that an opportunity will be afforded elsewhere to elucidate them. In the sections that follow, I reflect briefly on some of the philosophical, epistemological, and core concepts and ideas in Afrikan Psychology. To begin with, however, I reflect on the naming and scope of the subject of Afrikan Psychology.

Naming the discipline: African/Afrikan-centered Psychology or Psychology in Afrika?

Any introduction of a discipline or program of studies that is preceded by the term, “African,” has been met with controversy, vehement criticism, objection, and even outright rejection. We have seen this with Afrikan Literature and Afrikan Philosophy, to mention but a few. The objections are so strong that even to date, one finds disciplines such as Ethno-Philosophy, Ethno-Music, Ethno-Medicine, Ethno-Mathematics, and the like. The grand narrative is that there is universal and culture-free knowledge, which travels from the North to the South, and then “ethnic” studies, which are confined to small, intact communities in the South. Objections to Afrikan Psychology should be seen against this history of ideas.

The view that scholars in Afrika should be concerned with the applications of Psychology on the continent is not surprising. This is disturbing. It presupposes that all there is to be thought about the workings of the human mind (Spirit), and being human, in general, has been finalized (in Europe or the United States). The narrative is complete. The Afrikan continent, presumably incapable of the same level of concept formation and theory building, should be content with applications. Afrikan-centered Psychology is premised on the view that knowledge is always incomplete. A truly human psychology requires that we recognize the other, who is different from ourselves. This entails entering into a dialogue with their life histories, philosophies, ontologies, and epistemologies (Nabudere, 2011). Knowledge emerges from this dialogical encounter. The much-cited but less understood maxim, umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, seeks to bring to our attention the co-constitution of being, and the co-creation of knowledge, through dialogue (ingxoxo, indaba, ubu-dlelwano; the mutuality of being) (see Ramose, 1999). De Sousa Santos (2014) refers to this as the meeting of different ecologies of knowledge, none of which is superior to the other, a priori. There are even certain trends in Western scholarship that are vehemently opposed to the perspective that knowledge can be complete at any point in time (e.g., Bakthin, 1981; Gadamer, 1975). Hence, Afrikan Psychology does not refer to the application of Western-derived theories and tools/tests in non-Western contexts. Rather, it is a complex, theory-building exercise. It is grounded on indigenous philosophies, histories, epistemologies, ontology, and axiology arising from the Nile Valley civilizations (see L. J. Myers, 1987; G. E. Myers, 2004) and extends to the sources beyond the colonial era.

It may be argued that ideas privileging Spirit, community, connection, and the ancestors feature in many indigenous peoples, in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Asia, to mention a few. From an indigenous, Afrikan epistemology, which is orientated toward vibrations and affinities, the similarities are welcome. They provide a solid basis for the development of a humanitarian psychology. Apart from the above, at no stage have Afrikan scholars claimed these philosophies and epistemologies to be confined to Afrika. Doing so would negate the cross-continental sharing of knowledge, and the highways of wisdom that existed, pre-colonization, and continue to date (Bynum, 1999). Rather, the discipline is termed “Afrikan” to reflect the origin of the worldview that informs it (L. J. Myers, 1987). It also seeks to establish the point of view (location), or horizon of understanding, from which the annunciation is made. One can dispense with the adjective “African” before “Psychology” (as suggested by Baloyi in this edition) and in so doing eliminate the colonial gaze (naming) on the continent altogether. Nevertheless, the underlying worldview that informs the discipline, and the sources, texts, and practices, remains the same. In this regard, and to avoid this unnecessary confusion, it might be useful to explore indigenous names to refer to the discipline (e.g., -Ntu Healing, Ubuntu Healing, Ma’at Healing, Moya Studies, and Sakhu). All of this is a subject of current and future scholarly endeavors.

An inclusive epistemology and worldview

Opponents of the Afrikan-centered paradigm in Psychology are quick to dispense with it, on the grounds that it presupposes a singular and essentialist epistemology. It is argued as well that there is no single Afrikan worldview, and hence, there cannot be a doctrine or psychology that applies to all peoples of Afrikan ancestry. This argument arises partly from critics’ limited engagements with, and/or ignorance of, the primary texts that inform the Afrocentric paradigm (e.g., Asante, 2007; Diop, 1974; Hampâté Bâ, 1981). The failure to extricate oneself from the monovocality and monologism that has become the hallmark of the Eurocentric worldview, and language, is another contributing factor. The Afrikan-centered paradigm in Psychology is premised on an inclusive epistemology (Grills, 2002). This is commensurate with the view that there is no ME without YOU, no BLACK without WHITE, no FEMALE without MALE. This thinking is premised on the coexistence of opposites—a logic that is di-unital (ububini), as opposed to unital (Dixon, 1970). In the Afrocentric worldview, unity and diversity both coexist and complement each other. Marcel Griaule (1965), in the book, Conversations With Ogotemmêli, talks to this worldview at length, with reference to the Dogon, the descendants of Ancient Egypt (Kemet). Inclusive epistemology, comprising empirical, affective, cognitive, and the tangible and intangible dimensions of being, sees knowledge acquisition as a never-ending process of engaging with different forms of knowledges (Grills, 2002). Hence, knowing is becoming (inkambo, uku-Ba; Karenga, 2004; Ramose, 1999).

At the heart of critics’ objections is the failure to comprehend how the world is conceived in the Afrocentric paradigm: The world is in a continuous state of flux (becoming). Essentialism does not feature in the Afrocentric paradigm. This does not mean that a person of Afrikan ancestry cannot hold an essentialist view. Rather, we are concerned with ideas, the philosophies of peoples, and their moral ideals (Karenga, 2004). One cannot argue that individualism is not the primary organizing feature of modern European thought, simply because there are some Europeans who do not endorse it. Afrikan belief systems, writes Kolawole (1997), are

predicated on the philosophy of life as a negotiation of values, as a continuum, an intersection between the past, the present and the future. The world is conceived as a negotiation of diverse convictions and so heteroglossia is more valid to African thoughts as opposed to monovocality. (p. 35)

Diop (1974), Van Sertima (1994), Karenga (2004), Bynum (1999), Fu-Kiau (2001), and others have written at length about the worldview arising from the Nile Valley/Bantu Kongo civilization. This worldview has permeated the rest of the world, yet critics are ready to dismiss this profound scholarship without so much as an attempt at engaging with it. That there was fluidity of boundaries in pre-colonial Afrika, which facilitated the spread of knowledge, is not even considered. What we are referring to is a living rather than a dead tradition (Hampâté Bâ, 1981). Mutwa (1964) has written at length about his traversing of the entire Afrikan continent to learn from different sages, thus enriching his own knowledge.

However, the fact that this living tradition exists does not mean that it is shared to the same degree by all indigenous Afrikans, simply by virtue of their Afrikan heritage, in the same way that not every Greek is well-versed in what is termed Greek Philosophy. Griaule and Dieterlen (cited in Montgomery, 2009) reflect on the various levels of knowing in the Ancient Afrikan Mystery Systems (with reference to the Dogon). Knowledge begins with the giri so (knowledge dealing with the visible and ritual), then the benne so (certain parts of the rituals and representations being explained at a deeper level), followed by the bolo so (where the synthesis applies to greater parts of the whole), and, finally, the so dayi, the clear word, which “concerns itself with the edifice of knowledge in its ordered complexity” (Griaule & Dieterlen, 1986, pp. 69–70, cited in Montgomery, 2009, p. 21). Therefore, the Afrocentric paradigm in Psychology requires deep, and not peripheral, scholarship and thought. If we are to do justice to this paradigm, we need to move beyond the slaughtering of a goat or chicken, to the deeper levels of meaning. This calls for us to engage with the primary sources, some of which are cited in this article. It also means a greater collaboration with those who have been initiated in these systems and who are the custodians of the knowledge. It is furthermore important to note that the paradigm encompasses the pre-colonial, colonial, and the post-colonial sources.

Some orientating concepts in Afrikan-centered Psychology

Several authors (Akbar, 1994; Grills, 2002, 2004; Holdstock, 2000; Mkhize, 2004, 2018; Nobles, 2006; Nobles & Mkhize, 2020; Nwoye, 2015, 2017; Ratele, 2016; Van Sertima, 1994) have presented some of the main tenets of the Afrocentric paradigm in Psychology. The articles contained in this special edition touch upon some of these. Space does not allow me to expand on these concepts; the reader is referred to the sources for a fuller elaboration of the constructs.

Conclusions and recommendations

The philosophical and conceptual basis of the Afrocentric paradigm in Psychology is solid and well documented in the written and oral literature, continentally and in the Diaspora. The sources cut across disciplines. Only the lack of will prevents African universities from launching this paradigm on a full scale. Drawing from some of the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings that have been outlined in this special edition, the time is now ripe to intensify theory building and applications. We need autochthonous theories on child development, education, human/Spirit development, marriage and family life, gender, intellectual functioning, organizational development, emotional well-being, relationships, and the like. The development of assessment, intervention, and research measures (approaches), arising from this paradigm, is work in progress. The permeable and fluid worldview that informs the Afrocentric paradigm enables it to engage with, and incorporate, other points of view. Only that these views cannot be assumed to be superior a priori, let alone in the absence of evidence, nor does the Afrocentric paradigm claim to have spoken the final word. Finally, language, not only in terms of teaching, learning, and intervention but research as well, should be at the heart of the Afrocentric psychological paradigm.