A KENEZIAN DISSERTATION ON TRUTH AND REALITY IN RELIGION AS A PRELUDE TO SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF DETERMINING WHAT IS RELIGIOUS TRUTH IN IMPORTED VERSUS RENASCENT IGBO RELIGION.

  in English UK

Dr Jideofo Kenechukwu Danmbaezue, D.Sc.

Every branch of knowledge is comes under classical philosophy, the king of all studies whether scientific or not. That is why Ph. D. is regarded and is the summit of academic ascent. Other doctorate degrees build on this base, like D.Litt. and D.Sc., which are post-doctoral degrees obtained only by exceptional students who major in advanced researches in the specialised fields. All knowledge comes under the scrutiny of Philosophy. To appreciate my dissertation, therefore, we must establish baselines for what we can and should accept as truth for the citizens of this global village our world has turned into!

The meaning of truth has been explained by some philosophers as relating to objects or visible realities; namely Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Dewey and Descartes. These were the front liners in the realism, pragmatism and existentialism, for they raised and gave us insight into the question: 

WHAT IS TRUTH? 

They tried to answer; 

• Can truth be known with certainty without subjective colorinations by individuals? 
• How do we know that we actually know anything, in other words; what is reality?

Because of these types of questions, great thinkers tried and are still trying to decipher the nature of reality. Reality as we have earlier stated can be subjective or objective. Here, we are concerned with the reality that cuts across intellectual pursuits, academic excellence and international boundaries! Can reality be practically and conceptually perceived? 

In I S M or Kenezianism, we do not hold briefs for those who speak from both sides of their mouth or with their tongues in their cheeks! We blurt it out as it is. Truth is naked. Anywhere you find it wearing pants, bra, lipstick or sunshade, reject it for it has ceased to be truth! Truth is innocent and guiltless. It is always a newborn baby from the Creator.  Dr Kenez says.
   

Human knowledge is based upon the truth of things, facts, visible realities and evidence that mortal men observe in the created universe. To know the truth implies the knowledge, comprehension or understanding of reality. 
Knowledge or truth that arise from such sources as common sense, honest observation, right reasoning and practical experience are referred to and respected as scientific! That is our concern in this dissertation that will integrate all shades of opinion under normal temperature and pressure. 

Other sources like authority, tradition, intuition and revelation belong to another realm of knowledge where belief and faith reign supreme. This brand of knowledge has eternally been the conundrum the breeds disagreements, socio-centric nepotism, apartheid policies, racial inequalities in creed, politics and religion. Dr Kenez has reservations for these.

Following the practical or observable aspects of reality; Socrates; who incidentally was the first victim of holding on to the truth; with his students: Plato, Aristotle and some others maintained that truth was/is objective or that it is concerned with things in practical life. 

The greatest philosopher that gave us the genesis of true knowledge and thereby established the accurate definition of truth, was Rene Descartes who gave us the axiom “COGITO, EGO SUM’ literally meaning; “I DOUBT, THEREFORE I AM”; or “I know from my ability to doubt, that at least I exist” This is what is known as truth correspondence between what is said and what one says about it!

Prior to Descartes ultimate work on Epistemology, Aristotle had described truth in his Metaphysics thus: Truth consists in saying or affirming of being: that it is, and non-being, that it is not. 

This was also the view held by Grecian Parmenides and his co-patriot Protogoras. “All things are true in as much as they are”, and, “That is true which is in reality as it is seen by the one perceiving it” are other ways early philosophers described reality. 

The correspondence theory of the Great African Theologian, Augustine of Hippo summarised the point by stating that the nature of the truth consists in the conformity of thing with the intellect. 

The Italian Thomas Aquinas later opined that, truth is the correspondence of the intellect with the extra-mental object or particular entity. This he called ontological or existential truth, which is pragmatic, verifiable and subjective in that it is experienced and verifiable.

Those of us who belong to pragmatic and existential schools of thought agree, accept and affirm that truth being the formulation of experience is certain of popularity since in the final analysis; truth is always economical, convenient and successful in practice. It saves time and money as it insists on the cash-value of an idea. The pragmatist examines the fruits, consequences and facts of truth. It is expedient in the way of our thinking. In the case of the rational enterprise we are here concerned with, its rational coherence or consistency, really occurs when it agrees with the system of concept and relations already accepted as true by philosophers, natural scientists and computer-age students.

WHAT IS THE NATURE OF REALITY?

Some early thinkers claimed that our human world was/is divided into two realities:

• The world of visible data, visible objects and objective facts  based upon the theory of their independence from the perceiving individual, and
• The world of intuitions or perceived reality based on the theory that reality is internal, subjective and personal.

The world of objective fact exists independent of the knower! A fact exists and is not worried or affected by its being known that is to say a reality remains in its form, existence and essence, whether we know it or not. It is there in creation. We can find it if we want. It is for us to discover it, if we can. Whether we discover it or not, it does not cease to exist or be what it is.

Realists metamorphose into disciples of I S M

 Reality is something out there, obeying the laws of creation, regardless of our approval and belief. Research is the main tool for natural scientists. He collects data, analyses them employing both deductive and inductive reasoning. A realist recognises that facts are obstinate. We cannot wish facts away! They always refuse to quit. If one thrusts one’s finger into a flame it will burn. If one eats rotten food, he is sure of having a running stomach that needs medical intervention. The treatment is not dependent of the social status of the patient! Water gives life but can also kill when taken more than the lungs can cope with. Water does not pity a drowning man; tall or short, rich or poor, male or female, young or aged. If you do not know how to float you die inside too much water! That is the nature of objects in the world, regardless of who knows or is ignorant of them.

Kenezians and natural scientists know that Metaphysics is concerned with the study of reality which is perceived differently by the idealists, realists, pragmatists and existentialists. Philosophers discuss the nature of the existence of reality, the beings we share the universe with, the mortal man and his destiny, the natural and supernatural entities he theorises of, and the purpose of all the other living and non-living things he observes competing with him in the eternal survival of the fittest till his time on planet expires! Positivism is a claim that scientific laws and facts control physical, human behaviour, actions and emotions. Positivism ended the dogmatism and negativism of religionists and the assumptions and speculations of philosophy. Once you accept this ‘modus operandi’ you have arrived and you are welcome to the base of INTEGRATIONAL SPIRITAN MOVEMENT. It is the tool for globalisation of the true allegiance, loyalty and worship of the Almighty Creator of us all!

WHAT IS THE NATURE OF IDEALISM?

The idealist believes that man is a composite of mind and body, though with different capacities and functions. He has never seen the mind but knows from his daily feelings, verbalisations and thought that he possesses a spiritual aspect. Thus he regards himself as a part of the supreme or eternal spirit. He believes he has freewill and is determined to challenge the forces of nature. This explains the Kantian notion that man is both free and determined. He is deemed free because of his free will to make decisions responsibly but determined because he is a natural being who must obey the natural law, hence the conception of positivism or logical positivism.

If man is a child of God, then he definitely is part of God due to the possession of the dual gifts of soul or mind, the idealist argues. Therefore, idealists argue that the child or pupil of religion ought to be educated to fulfil his spiritual elements. The child should be educated to be properly integrated spiritually and corporeally to appreciate his invisible and visible nature. He must be educated to realise that the universe has a meaning and purpose. This knowledge is believed by the idealist to be innate in man. The role of the teacher is to pull out knowledge or ideas already contained within the individual.

 Idealists eventually metamorphose into religionists

The idealist teacher has the function of inculcating in all members of a community the notion of respecting one’s family, town,

or nation. According to Kristnamurti, education is to understand the adequate meaning of life through critical education that creates self-knowledge which is awareness of the total psychological process.  With the acquisition of self-knowledge, one understands the futility of egoism, selfishness, violence, efficiency, etc promoted by modern technical education; hence the right type of education properly integrates both the educator and the educand into accepting the norms and mores of the community, thereby cultivating high values.

Realism, on the other hand, can be grouped into rational, hence its forms of the classical and religious perspective and scientific or pragmatist realism. The religious or scholastic Thomist and the classical realism follow the foot-step of Aristotle, though the

religious realism embraces Aquina’s view. Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic theologian synthesized and adopted the Aristotlean philosophy to the Christian doctrines. The classical and the scholastic/religious realist agree that the material world exists independent of man’s approval or disapproval.

Scholasticism, the Christian philosophy begun by Augustine of Africa reached its popularity through Aquinas’ philosophical contribution. While Augustine adopted the Platonic view of the usage of ideas, Aquinas followed the Aristotlean view of science. The aim of Scholasticism was to harmonize faith with reason. Thus, it rationalised the Christian teaching through the scholastic method which consisted of stating

• the position of proposition;
• the refutation of any contrary view or thesis to the proposition,
• the proof of the accepted proposition; (iv) and the analysis or refutation of any objection to the advanced proof.

Scholasticism prevailed in the European Universities in the Middle Ages until the advent of modern philosophy which emphasised rationally, experience and analysis to be-little or dwarf faith and critical dogmatism. The scholasticism agreed that God created material things and supernatural entities in an orderly and harmonious manner yet it maintains that reason and experience induced man to know that the spiritual element of man’s nature was superior to matter. It employed reason and experience to synthesize faith and not to contradict it. The scholastic philosophy supported the view that man, though immortal, was free and responsible for his actions, hence children should be educated to be intellectually well-balanced persons as against those who are simple well-adjusted to the physical and social environment. ¹⁰ This notion is Greek and Roman whereby moral, intellectual and physical elements are co-ordinated to form an educand who is intelligent, wise, courageous, temperate and responsible in discharging his duties as a citizen.

The scientific or natural realism of F. Bacon, J. Locke, D. Hume, B. Russell and A. North Whitehead, contributed to the development of scientific knowledge through the positivism or logical positivism in 19^th century. The scientific realism argues that the mission of philosophy is to co-ordinate the concepts and discoveries of sciences. It holds that the universe is not permanent and that change is real in observing the natural law which is constant and unchanging.

• The natural realist believes that the existence of the invisible realities is unreal and the invisible entities cannot be proved empirically because they cannot be experienced.
• The scientific realist argues that man is basically biological and he does not have free will, hence the Kantian or Marxian view that man is casually determined by his physical and social environment and nature.
• The realists especially the classical and the religious ones think that man and the world, as creatures of God should be directed towards the transcendent cause, hence education prepares the individual for life after death but on the other hand, education for the pragmatist is not a preparation for life but life itself.
• The pragmatist sees reality as the interaction of the human being with his environment and that is why reality is regarded as the sum total of what we experience since what cannot be experienced is unreal for the pragmatist.
• The pragmatist maintains that it is the individual who creates his own reality which is subject to change. The existentialist also perceives reality as something personally experienced and lived without pretences. Individuals, according to this view, ought to interpret reality freely and responsibly.

2.         Epistemology: Theory of Knowledge:

One is curious to know oneself and the world. Knowledge in opposing belief, ignorance and opinion, is a result of adequate information from many sources, namely, human experience, reason, revelation, authority and intuition. What one knows must have three elements or factors, namely, it must be truthful, observable with reason and there must be evidence for what we know.

 Man wants to know in order to dispel his ignorance and fears of the surroundings. Knowledge establishes facts of realities. It purges the human mind from superstitious beliefs, wrong assumptions, theories, issued, in order to establish the truth about things and claims.

Epistemology raises question about the origins, nature and the scope of human knowledge. Some of its objectives include investigating whether knowledge is probable or whether some knowledge is certain. It wants to find out how we obtain “knowledge” from the surroundings; “discover” knowledge or “invent” it? Is all knowledge of equal value or not? And how are we sure of our answer? Is there one or more methods of knowing? Is it possible that one should know something in its entirety.

Epistemology argues that man acquires knowledge about reality, no matter, the imperfections in the human understanding. This claim challenges the views of the sceptics in the Middle Ages who maintained that the knowledge of an object was impossible. However, man cannot boast of knowing and comprehending an object in its entirety. At least, we must assert that man has a partial knowledge of his own existence and the existence of other material objects. If he acknowledges that he is or exists, he must recognize that some other existent being both visible and invisible are or exist. Some sources of knowledge include empirical, rational, authoritative, intuitive and revealed sources.

i.          Empirical or scienctific knowledge:

To know something entails to be acquainted with the object. To know in Latin is “scientia” from “scire”, from where science derives its claim of validity. There are three processes in knowledge – the individual or the subject, the object to be known and mental act that establishes a relationship between the subject and the known object.

The empirical knowledge is acquired through the sense perception. The experience of the subject plays a great role in that the investigator collects data, sees the materials, manipulates them, observes and makes experiments to verify his results. There is no authority except facts which can be obtained by observation. The empiricist or scientist believes that nothing is in the mind what is has not been perceived” “nihill est in intellect non fuerit in sensu”, hence the Lockean view of “tabula rasa” – the clean blank of the human mind at birth. Thus, all deductions are made from facts

Empirical knowledge does not operate through the sense perception alone-it believes in doing, in action for practical result. It supports the Chjinese proverb that states “that what I say I remember, what I hear, if forget, what I do, I understand.” This is graphically put: “one showing is worth a hundred sayings.

This type of knowledge is promoted by scientists and philosophers. Such thinkers include Aristotle (384-322 BC), John Locke (1632-1704), Herberb Spencer (1820-1903) – the English evolutionist who believes that empirical knowledge is the most valuable and worthier than the other sources of knowledge. Other notable supporters of empiricism include: Francis Fenelon (1561-1715), John Amon Comenius (1592-1670), Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Roger Bacon (1214-1670). Francis Bacon supported the use of scientific method in establishing rational knowledge. This method destroys what he called the idols of the mind, namely, the idols of the tribe, cave, market place and theatre.

Empirical knowledge supports the acquisition of concrete, practical, vocational skills, mathematical, philosophy, pure sciences, language for communications for diplomatic reasons, concrete study of history, politics, etc. for their benefits and not for literacy and artistic reasons as in the classical periods. It pays little attention to arts, music and literature as it criticises dogmatic, authoritarian teaching and doctrines as they cannot be demonstrated practically. Empirical education emphasizes doing, action and production of material goods through technology in science. It pays little attention to higher values geared towards spiritual development and that is one of the reason why it is suspicious to the Christian idealists.

ii.         Rational knowledge

This type of knowledge is acquired by the use of reason through the agency of human intellect. Some philosophers claim that rational knowledge is superior to the sensory knowledge in that rational knowledge establishes truth of the facts which are more tenable and ever constant as evidenced in mathematics. Its superiority over empirical knowledge is based on the view that scientific knowledge is in constant change. However, the rationalist does not ignore that the sensory knowledge is the raw material for intellectual activity. For the rationalist, senses give partial knowledge. The propounders of rational knowledge include Plato, Socrates, Rene Descrates, George Berkeley, etc. rational knowledge promotes mathematics, philosophy and critical studies.

Rational knowledge can be classified into three major parts: the principle of exclude middle; the principle of non-contradiction and the principle of identity. The principle of excluded middle states that one whole cannot be put into fraction and still exists properly. No statement can be half true or false. It is either true or false. The principle of non-contradiction maintains that a thing cannot be that thing and the opposite at the same time. For instance, Angelina is a woman, she is just a woman and can never be a man. The principle of identity claims that one thing is one and not more than one at the same time. If something is true or false, it is true or false. Thus, we can vividly and logically assert that all men are mortal and Joseph is a man and conclude that Joseph who is a man is mortal.

CRITICAL THINKING AND SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

Scientific or empirical method is a child of critical thinking which is one of the aims of philosophy and proper method of tackling issues in human life. What does critical thinking mean? It is a process by which one constructively gives a close examination, re-examination or reappraisal of the theorems, opinions, ideas, issues, methods, etc which are adopted by people in society. It is not a mere criticism for the sake of criticising issues and opinions. Critical thinking is done on good faith to erase misconceptions and confusions. It clarifies misunderstanding. Once a free individual understands an issue, he or she is in the position to evaluate matters for the purposes of establishing the truth concerning situations.

Critical thinking creates initiative and independence of the person to refrain from dancing to the tune of the crowd or what an existentialist thinker-Kar Jaspers called the ‘Herd’. Opinions and concepts should be subjected to constant re-examination and analysis in order to be permanent and unchangeable. Things and values do change; reality changes. It is the duty of a critical thinker who must be responsible to effect a positive change for prosperity.

 Some examples of proofs arising from critical approach are witnessed in logic which is used to clarify concepts. It is the law governing conclusions or rational or intellectual proofs that are valid.

i.    if we establish that all living creatures are mortal as first premise and establish

that Okonkwo is a living creature as the second premise. The conclusion is that Okonkwo is mortal.

ii. Have you ever seen a mouse sucking like lambs and puppies? Have you seen a

mouse laying eggs? No. But a mouse gives birth to young ones just as sheep and dogs. All animals that bear young mammals feed their babies with the mother’s milk. Though we have never seen a baby mouse do so only because mice may be shy of humans when they suckle their young ones.

Scientific method is interested in the investigation of things and establishment of new facts, truth of reality or existence. Scientific method is empirical and not speculative philosophy in that the scientific method collects facts or data, observes and probes into them and presents result which must be tested and subjected to verification before establishing them as valid, constant and absolute. This method is open to every person to test and prove or disprove the result. It rejects all assumptions and presumptions.

However, its result though acceptable to be absolute for a particular time, but it is still provisional because it is subject to change with time if a new result is reached with new instruments and invention challenge and disprove the old ones. Thus, the scientific method like philosophy is not dogmatic.

From what we have stated above, it means that proofs and verification are tools in philosophy. Proofs are used by intellect in proving theoretical and mathematical problems to establish knowledge or truth about reality or existence whilek verification uses data, observation and experiments to do the same. Proofs and verification are based on ontology or metaphysics-the knowledge of something in existence. We realise that ontology is the science or knowledge of being, the knowledge which is derived from critical thinking about the natural phenomena. This is established with the use of the principle of cause and effect understood through critical thinking. With rational knowledge, one arrives at adequate conclusions with the help of accurate principles.

PHILOSOPHY AND EMPIRICAL SCIENCE:

It is difficult to separate philosophy and science since both of them are in search of knowledge. The English word “sciencio” which literally means “knowledge”, hence “sciencio” or “scio” means “I know”. Both philosophy and science are objective, rational and systematic studies of the universe. Both of them are critical, analytic and sceptical since none of them tolerates any claim or belief without critically analyzing it. Each adopts signs and symbols as observed in algebra, mathematics or symbolic logic.

In logic or sound reasoning, philosophy uses deductive and inductive statements and arguments to ascertain facts as the empirical sciences do. Logic which is an aspect of epistemology is treated in Chapter Three.

Philosophy serves as the basis of all the disciplines in search of knowledge and truth but whenever a definite disciplines or subject attains a definite knowledge on its own area, it secedes and becomes an independent discipline of knowledge, for instance, mathematics, psychology, astronomy, etc. They are now separate fields of study, unlike, in the past, when they were fused in philosophy. Before the modern times, mathematics, was regarded – as natural philosophy, hence, according to B. Russell, the Newton’s major work was termed “The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy.” The separate fields of study narrow and limit itself in scope just as psychology is concerned with the discourse of mind or soul and astronomy for the study of the heavenly bodies. The philosophy knowledge is embracing and it unifies all other sciences by its critical, analytical and evaluative approach in establishing truth.

The only difference between science and philosophy is that the former engages in experimental, data collection, hypothesis, verification and provisional results based on empirical facts. Its result is factual, precise, definite and verifiable by an interested person. The result is open and it is subjected to change from time to time. While science explains how things work and not why they work, philosophy explains critical why things work or behave the way they behave and justifies its claims rationally and dispassionately. Thus, the role of philosophy, after loosing her children is to examine the fundamental assumptions, principles and the nature of the sciences whether natural, social and human since science as an organised knowledge can be divided into these areas. The basic notion of science is the idea of law of nature. It is only philosophy that can investigate this basic notion common to all the aspects of science.

Philosophy critically explains the meanings of the concepts adopted in science such as hypothesis, theory, cause, etc, hence, philosophy of science is one of the highly respected themes in philosophy.¹¹

(iii)       Authoritative Knowledge:

An authority is a specialist in a particular field of study. A specialist or an expert information can be obtained from men viz, scientists, geographers, economists, historians, etc. The communists regard Karl Marx as an authority, the Catholic regards the Pope as an authority, M. Luther is respected by the Protestant, Nigeria respects Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe as an authority in statesmanship.

Some books are special authoritative sources –viz, the Holy Scripture, Koran, Das Kapital, Encyclopaedia, Dictionary, etc. Institutions have authority e.g. The Church, the Armed Forces Council, the School, the State, etc.

There are some problems in this type of knowledge in that the views of the authorities in the same field may conflict and disagree. Some of the institutions may be dogmatic, reactionary, high handedness, oppressive, etc. One must be careful in accepting every opinion of the authorities. Verify the assumptions instead of relying on the “magister dixit” – the “authority says” principles, for instance, Aristotle has once been an authority in asserting that horses (or women) have more teeth than men, but it is left for us to find out by ourselves by counting the teeth of horses or women.

(iv)       Intuitive Knowledge:

An intuitive knowledge is a direct and immediate knowledge arising internally from the individual. It is a sudden or a surging apprehension without the intermediary of sense perception or conscious thought. It is a feeling that something is true and certain. It is a thought starving device.

Some ethical values in the Bible are intuited; some mathematical solution to problems, axioms, postulation are intuited truths. Sometimes, you intuit that your tribe is superior to other tribes or races. Some literary writers intuit in their literature and some artists have intuitive experience.

(v).       Revealed Knowledge:

This type of knowledge comes from an external source-God or Deity. Prophets assume that God communicates with them. Revelations consist of prescriptions and descriptions about the human behaviour. Such revelations are contained in the Bible, Koran, and some other holy writs and are imparted in the study of religious studies, social studies, etc. This sort of knowledge or truth is not verifiable empirically and scientifically. But philosophy upholds that truth ought to be experienced or reasoned out. It is thus necessary to consider philosophy and religion to know their differences and relationship.

PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION:

Religion as man’s linkage to a higher and superior entity or being does not necessarily rely on reason for establishing its belief systems. Generally, religion resorts to faith, belief in supernatural being and revelation and engages in rituals of prayer, sacrifice, rites, sacraments and sacramental. It is dogmatic and conservative as it believes in authority and, hence, it is creed-oriented and authoritarian. Religion is sometimes called the opium of the people by Marx as the people have imbibed it to the extent that it intoxicates them. Religion does not raise question on what can be known by man’s reason and experience; what man can or ought to know or do as a human and free person. Rather, it expects man to know and do like gods. But the truth is that man is not a god and he has to know and do what is practicable within his natural capacity moderated by reason and experience.

On the other hand, philosophy as we have noted, searches for truth, wisdom and knowledge with reason, subjecting its findings to critical scrutiny and analysis with open mind to adopt to new ideas philosophy is a liberal art and science and Plato had defined it in the Phaedo as the “noblest and greatest of arts.”

The two disciplines of philosophy and religion are far apart from their approach to achieve their objectives- knowledge or truth. While philosophy adopts rational, experiential and critical approach, religion emphasizes belief and faith. However, a philosopher can still be religious and vice versa, hence a theologian adopts a ‘reasoned belief’ in discussing divinity on the basis that ‘logos’ is a discourse and “theo” is relating to God, that is to say that theology is a reasoned discourse on God.

Scholasticism in the Middle or Dark Ages harmonized or reconciled faith with reason, hence the view of “belief with knowledge and knowledge with belief.” It is latinised as ‘credo ut intelligam’, “intelligo ut credam” which literally mean “I believe in order to know: I know in order to believe.” The leading scholastics or learned schoolmen were Catholic philosophers and theologians and notably among them were Augustine of Africa (354-430), Bonaventure (1221-1274), St. Anslem (1033-1109) Aquinas (1223-1274). Today, we have many reputable philo-theologians, such as C.B. Okolo, I. C. Onyewuenyi, V. Chukwulozie, both of them professed philosophy at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

REFERENCES

1.                  Aristotle’s Metaphysics Book 12 Chapter Nine

2.                  Copleston F. A. A History of philosophy, vol. 1. Newman Press, Westminster, Maryland, 1959 P. 28.

3.                  Alpern, H. March of philosophy, N. Y. 19 34, P. 99

4.                  Aristotle’s Politics, Book 1 Ch. 2

5.                  Copleston, F. A. History of philosophy, vol 1 Newman Press, Westminster, Maryland, New Revised 1959 p. 316

6.                  Aristotle’s Metaphysics iv. 7.

7.                   Okafor, F. C. Philososphy of Education and The Thrid World Perspective, 3^rd Edition Star Publishers, Enugu. P. 165.

8.                  Okafor, E. C. Op Cit, P. 164.

9.                  Kristnamurti, J. Education and Significance of Life, Publisher, Victor Gollancz Ltd. London. 1978, p 17.

10.              Kneller, G. F. Introduction To The Philosophy of Education, John Willey and Sons, Inc. N. Y. 1971, 2^nd edition p. 13.

11.              Eneh, J. O. History and Philosophy of Science: An Out line: pub. Magnet Business Enterprises, Enugu, Nigeria, 2000

    NOTA BENE ;

I WRITE, TYPE AND UPLOAD ALL MY PAPERS, DIATRIBES, PICTURS, VIDEOS AND DISSERTATIONS.

I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILTIES FOR ALL THE ERRORS OF THE KEYBOARD I MAKE, THEY WERE NOT DELIBERATE…  THEY ONLY REMIND ME THAT I AM STILL A FINITE BEING AND PRONE TO ALL THE HUMAN WEAKNESSES OTHER HAVE. PRAY FOR ME 

THE REVOLUTIONARY DEPOSITION OF DR KENEZ

IMPORTED RELIGIONS BROUGHT OUR DECLINE IN SOCIAL MORALITY IN BIAFRA, THE LAND OF THE RISING SUN AND CONSCIENTIOUS RETRAINING OF OUR YOUTHS IN A PROGRAMMED FAMILY VALUES OF OUR AUTHENTIC VALUE SYSTEM IS THE ANSWER.

The Genesis of Immorality in Biafra Was the Arrival and Assimilation of Foreign Religions and Westernisation

The desecration of our pre-colonial high moral values started with the arrival of the first white missionaries in West Africa. What the natives called “NSO-ANI” was re-branded FORGIVEABLE SINS and so watered down the sanctity of religious values in Biafra. Its partner, WESTERN EDUCATION neatly completed the ‘coup de grace’ as the foreign concepts and social values of the colonialists destroyed the social ethics of the natives and rendered our pristine mores and norms ineffective. In some communities; “aping the white man’s dress code and mannerisms became fashionable and ignoring the customs and traditions of the community was seen as the criterion of being EDUCATED and MORE CIVILISED than the illiterate folks in the villages!
---------

DR JIDEOFO KENECHUKWU DANMBAEZUE, @ 30/06/2013 04:14:32 HRS GMT.