{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015434606011372868, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.466666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Yielding ground to none”: Normative perspectives on African philosophy and its curricula

I suggest an analytical framework for considering the obligations of African philosophers concerning the practice and pedagogy of their discipline. The suggested approach can facilitate clarity about various distinctions whose conflation can impede understanding of disagreements about such obligations, including distinctions between normative issues and empirical issues, and various distinctions among normative issues, including values versus obligations, collective obligations versus personal obligations, more imperfect obligations versus less imperfect obligations, and so on. I illustrate the approach by describing and critically assessing four perspectives on the collective obligations of African philosophers as such with respect to African philosophy and its curricula: utopian, dystopian, apolitical, and pluralistic. Without endorsing any of the four normative perspectives outright, I argue that the pluralistic perspective responds comprehensively to various considerations that are problematic for the other perspectives. I tentatively commend the analytical framework employed here as possibly being of use more broadly.