Up to now, a very large majority of work in the religious philosophy of life’s meaning has presumed a conception of God that is Abrahamic. In contrast, in this essay I critically discuss some of the desirable and undesirable facets of Traditional African Religion’s salient conceptions of God as they bear on meaning in life. Given an interest in a maximally meaningful life, and supposing meaning would come from fulfiling God’s purpose for us, would it be reasonable to prefer God (...) as characteristically conceived by African philosophers of religion to exist instead of the Abrahamic conception of God? At this stage of enquiry, I answer that, in respect of the range of people to whom God’s purpose would apply, a more African view of God would plausibly offer a greater meaning, but that, concerning what the content of God’s purpose would be, the Abrahamic view appears to offer a greater one. I conclude by reflecting on this mixed verdict and by suggesting respects in which non-purposive facets of the African and Abrahamic conceptions of God could also have implications for life’s meaning. (shrink)

In his 2015 Theoria article titled ‘A Rejection of Humanism in African Moral Tradition’, Motsamai Molefe argues that Kwasi Wiredu's humanistic interpretation of traditional Akan ethics cannot be the best account of African ethics because Wiredu overlooks the significant sentiment in traditional African thought that regards reality as a holistic totality of spiritual, social and environmental components. I point out that Molefe's rejection of Wiredu's humanism follows from the latter's de-emphasising of supernaturalism. I argue that Molefe overlooks the fact that (...) the displacement of God in this humanism is consistent with the limited God sentiment in traditional African thought, which confirms Wiredu's humanistic ethics as one rooted in traditional African worldviews. Adopting the method of philosophical exposition and analysis, I show how Wiredu's limited God framework motivates scepticism about the possibility of a supernaturalist ethics and renders a humanistic orientation a more attractive account of African moral tradition. (shrink)

In this article, I locate Okot p’Bitek’s evaluation of African traditional religion and his critique of the traditional African theistic stance in the broader African limited God tradition. I argue that while p’Bitek’s claim is plausible that traditional African societies do not believe in a supreme being that possesses the omni-properties in the context of commitment to the limitation thesis, the other claim, that these societies are atheistic because they merely acknowledge the reality of mystical forces and powers rather than (...) God or gods, constitutes a hasty, unsustainable generalisation. Adopting the method of philosophical exposition and argumentation, I point out that in purporting to make a cultural statement in favour of atheism, p’Bitek fails to reckon with the existence of two culturally rooted but conflicting views of God in African traditional religion and traditional African thought. One view endorses traditional theism while the other, for the most part, proposes that God is limited in power, knowledge and goodness. I argue that both views are damaging to p’Bitek’s second claim. (shrink)

Wiredu has argued that traditional Akan (African) ethics is humanistic in orientation and that human welfare, rather than God’s will, is the basis of morality. In response, Motsamai Molefe asserts that Wiredu’s conclusion overlooks the supernaturalist dimension of traditional African ontology which presents God as the apex being in the universe and the ultimate ground of reality. According to Molefe, a vitalistic conception of God supports the claim that an African supernaturalist ethics is possible. He proceeds to develop an intriguing (...) supernaturalist vitality-based ethics that makes God the foundation of morality. I argue in this article that while Molefe indeed succeeds in demonstrating the possibility of an African supernaturalist ethics, Wiredu’s humanistic framework has a practical advantage over Molefe’s supernaturalist framework to the extent that the problem of revelation in African Traditional Religion forces Molefe’s supernaturalist ethics to assume a speculative aspect. I point out that a vitalistic God who acts intentionally may well define morality in terms of a divine property like knowledge rather than vitality. (shrink)