Epistemic boundaries that were established during colonial times persist in many current academic curricula. This article presents ways to overcome such epistemic boundaries. The article addresses the following key question: How can teachers and students across the globe transform education in such a way that it contributes to epistemic justice of historically oppressed knowledge and cultivates critical consciousness? The article introduces education for liberation as a re-humanising pedagogy, through Mogobe Ramose’s “pan-epistemic education”, Paulo Freire’s “pedagogy of the oppressed”, and Heinz Kimmerle’s dialogical approach to intercultural philosophy. Based on an analysis of the “African Philosophy” course at Wageningen University (WUR), The Netherlands, the article presents seven pedagogical features that have proven to be effective, which can be summarised as E-T-H-I-C-A-L: Embrace epistemic justice; Transform educational methods; Honour dialogues; Illustrate theories and concepts; Conduct critical self-reflection; Apply philosophy in an interdisciplinary context; and Liberate our minds. These seven pedagogical features should not be seen as a framework that leads to ethical engagement. Instead, it recognises education as an ethical undertaking, which requires ethical engagement in education. The seven pedagogical features show that education for liberation calls for transformation of the curriculum in terms of content as well as process. Academic teachers tend to place a lot of emphasis on the content, while they often have limited experience with the design and facilitation of dialogical teaching methods that cultivate critical consciousness. Therefore, the article makes a plea that education for liberation needs innovation on both content and process.
Today’s scientific and technological world operates largely with a frontier mentality. The effect of this mentality on modernity, human civilisation and planetary wellbeing is alarming. Just as science aided the development of the modern world, many ecological challenges, ecosystemic destruction and biodiversity loss are also engendered by scientific or technological inventions. Therefore, it is suitable to investigate how science and technology can be hinged firmly on a value-oriented framework, rather than outstripping value in response to its own progressive logic. This article reports on a case study that, among other things, attempted to formulate an ethic of the planetary system. It is argued that such an ethical stance is best encapsulated by the case study’s envisioned epistemic-based ethics (EBE). Drawing insights from previous empirical case studies of genetic engineering (GE), the current case study employed the philosophico-phenomenological method to investigate GE. Conceptual clarification and hermeneutical methods were used to re-interpret texts, while the logical reconstruction of existing ideas was employed to aid the development and application of the envisioned EBE framework. Therefore, the article concludes that EBE is a suitable framework for developing science and technological output that has a value-laden stance. Such an attitude would not only assist in making decisions where value-laden questions in technological advancement are concerned, but also guide choices towards a sustainable planetary wellbeing.
This article argues that South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) instrumentalised ubuntu to promote forgiveness as a moral obligation for victims of apartheid violence. It argues that the TRC’s ethical framework misrepresented ubuntu by conflating it with amnesty and emotional closure, thus imposing undue pressure on victims to forgive in service of national unity. Drawing on transitional justice theory, the article traces how the TRC positioned restorative justice as a “third way” – a mechanism meant to achieve the goals of both retributive and reparative justice. Through public truth-telling and full disclosure by the perpetrators, the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995 (PNURA) sought to validate the victims’ suffering while ensuring a form of moral accountability. However, in practice, truth-telling was framed as a substitute for accountability, and reconciliation was treated as contingent on the victims’ willingness to forgive. The article contends that this framework not only marginalised those unwilling to forgive but also transformed personal trauma into a political tool, thereby reinforcing state narratives of unity at the expense of the victims’ autonomy. Through a critical reading of ubuntu – particularly as interpreted by the philosopher Mogobe Ramose – the article shows that genuine ubuntu is not reducible to forgiveness, but rather grounded in accountability, restitution, and relational integrity. It concludes that the TRC’s approach betrayed the very ethical principles it claimed to uphold, undermining both justice and reconciliation. Instead of fostering healing, the TRC’s demand for state-mediated forgiveness risked retraumatising victims and distorting ubuntu into an instrument of political expediency rather than a meaningful path to communal restoration.
(TRC) instrumentalised ubuntu to promote forgiveness as a moral obligation for victims of apartheid violence. It argues that the TRC's ethical framework misrepresented ubuntu by conflating it with amnesty and emotional closure, thus imposing undue pressure on victims to forgive in service of national unity. Drawing on transitional justice theory, the article traces how the TRC positioned restorative justice as a "third way" - a mechanism meant to achieve the goals of both retributive and reparative justice. Through public truth-telling and full disclosure by the perpetrators, the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995 (PNURA) sought to validate the victims' suffering while ensuring a form of moral accountability. However, in practice, truth-telling was framed as a substitute for accountability, and reconciliation was treated as contingent on the victims' willingness to forgive. The article contends that this framework not only marginalised those unwilling to forgive but also transformed personal trauma into a political tool, thereby reinforcing state narratives of unity at the expense of the victims' autonomy. Through a critical reading of ubuntu - particularly as interpreted by the philosopher Mogobe Ramose - the article shows that genuine ubuntu is not reducible to forgiveness, but rather grounded in accountability, restitution, and relational integrity. It concludes that the TRC's approach betrayed the very ethical principles it claimed to uphold, undermining both justice and reconciliation. Instead of fostering healing, the TRC's demand for state-mediated forgiveness risked retraumatising victims and distorting ubuntu into an instrument of political expediency rather than a meaningful path to communal restoration.
Today's scientific and technological world operates largely with a frontier mentality. The effect of this mentality on modernity, human civilisation and planetary wellbeing is alarming. Just as science aided the development of the modern world, many ecological challenges, ecosystemic destruction and biodiversity loss are also engendered by scientific or technological inventions. Therefore, it is suitable to investigate how science and technology can be hinged firmly on a value-oriented framework, rather than outstripping value in response to its own progressive logic. This article reports on a case study that, among other things, attempted to formulate an ethic of the planetary system. It is argued that such an ethical stance is best encapsulated by the case study's envisioned epistemic-based ethics (EBE). Drawing insights from previous empirical case studies of genetic engineering (GE), the current case study employed the philosophico-phenomenological method to investigate GE. Conceptual clarification and hermeneutical methods were used to re-interpret texts, while the logical reconstruction of existing ideas was employed to aid the development and application of the envisioned EBE framework. Therefore, the article concludes that EBE is a suitable framework for developing science and technological output that has a value-laden stance. Such an attitude would not only assist in making decisions where value-laden questions in technological advancement are concerned, but also guide choices towards a sustainable planetary wellbeing.
