Foundations of an African Science

ÌRÒ Science Foundation
Iro Foundation
Published in
9 min readNov 4, 2021

Notes towards the resurrection of African Knowledge

Image from https://thriveglobal.com/stories/8-steps-to-connect-with-the-universe-and-create-the-life-you-want/

Relationality

Within an African worldview, no entity (animate or inanimate), nor idea (abstract or concrete), exists in isolation. Every component of the universe is intimately connected to the next. Nothing can exist by itself. It is the relationships that are the defining features of any aspect of the world around us. All entities and ideas are connected to and share various characteristics of the whole, which is derived from the primordial source of creation. The primordial source of creation exists in everything and at every level of the universe. Throughout the multiplicity of African cultures, there are a number of various names for this primordial source of creation. In this work, we do not seek to focus on one specific term that is used to describe these phenomena but rather elucidate the common themes in an effort to unify these cultural understandings. In the context of our work here, we refer to the existence of a common force of creation that acts as the connecting factor of all reality as relationality.

Relationality is a foundational understanding of an African Science; nothing exists or can be understood in isolation. Everything in existence operates within an infinite web of dynamically changing and mutually informing relationships. In the context of developing an African Science, we posit that relationality must sit at the very foundation of our scientific development and inquiry.

Knowledge is not a freely existing, untethered entity that is unchanging regardless of place or time. Within an African paradigm, we understand that research, inquiry, and discovery, and knowledge itself are culturally contextualized and relationally based. The foundation and essence of knowledge are derived from a shared set of experiences, relationships, interactions, and beliefs and grows out of a paradigmatic worldview that provides the lens through which the world is seen and interpreted. We must understand the subjective, or relational, quality of knowledge, and that all knowledge is a cultural outgrowth. It is essential to realize that science itself is a relational phenomenon. It is directly concerned with a people’s set of relationships with the physical and spiritual aspects of the universe.

Three important principles of relationality between co-existing entities are:

  • A common source from which they are derived
  • Interdependent
  • Changes, alterations, or movements in one produces a corresponding change in the other.

These principles are essential in defining and understanding the nature of any entity and our relationships to it.

Cyclic Nature of Existence

The cycle is a fundamental quality of nature and a principal aspect of existence. All macro and micro divisions of time exist in the form of cycles. Physically, the expressions of cyclicality can be seen on multiple scales of the universe. Akoto & Akoto (2000) state that,

“The principle of the cycle is evident in every facet of nature. It is apparent in the passage of the constellations, the birth and internal dynamics of quasars, galaxies, and stars, of the sun and planets, of the moon, of the seasons in the year […] The cycle is the defining feature of human life. It defines the course of life and its several defining seasons.” (p. 28)

The fundamental trajectory of time and even change itself is cyclic, and all aspects of movement are best understood as cycles. The concepts of linear growth and development and even linear time are fallacious and arise out of the microscopic view of life and the universe that many Western cultures hold. Linear confusion arises due to limits in perspective, vantage point, and the absence of a comprehensive historical analysis.

Every entity has its own cycle and one can only acquire a fundamental understanding and connection to an entity through sustained intergenerational observation as it moves naturally through its cycles.

This cyclic dynamic of the universe is developmental and progressive. In various cultures across the African continent and its diaspora, this dynamic movement of reality is physically expressed through the movement of a serpent. Akoto & Akoto (2000) captures this symbolism in the following way:

“[In the serpent’s] progressive, cyclic and undulating motion, it reproduces the spiraling cycles that ancients attribute to the very essence of nature and reality […] this spirocyclic dynamic is characteristic of both the material and spiritual. The spirocycle can consequently be considered a basic principle of reality. The spirocycle itself is a constant in nature, and is applicable to social and natural phenomena.” (p. 28)

The Sprirocycle is a conceptual and paradigmatic framework that illustrates that the topography of our historical movement is ever-changing and fraught with relative high points, low points, and points of transition.

Akoto & Akoto (2000) describe critical components of the spirocyclic nature of reality:

- The cycle is a fundamental condition of creation. It describes the dynamic nature of balance and reciprocity.

- There are cycles within cycles, and seasons within each cycle.

- There are no precise points of beginning and ending.

- Each cycle is informed by the preceding cycle and does not mirror it. (p. 18)

We must utilize a spirocyclic analysis of any phenomenon that we seek to understand and study. We must be patient and withhold conclusions, judgments, or posit explanations until we observe the phenomenon’s clear trajectory of change and cyclic internal dynamics. Comprehensive precipitation of this level of understanding will yield a dynamic and vibrant stream of knowledge that will allow us to rhythmically relate to the resonant internal frequency of the phenomenon.

Mediated Knowledge

Knowledge or knowing does not occur all at once. Both the internal dynamics of a phenomena and our internal dynamics serve to mediate knowledge, filter information, and regulate interactions. The idea of the Mframadan Zimbabwe model provides a framework to analyze the dynamics of mediated knowledge.

In The Sankofa Movement, Akoto & Akoto (2000) describe the Mframadan Zimbabwe model as the following:

“The Mframadan Zimbabwe framework can be represented by three coaxial or concentric ellipses/spheres. The relationship of the three spheres is analogous to the three spheres of the earth; first the geosphere; secondly, the biosphere; and thirdly, the upper atmosphere […] the term sovereign [is used] in describing each sphere […] each is a protected domain, though they are linked and interactive […] like the earth, the second and third spheres are layers of shielding for the innermost and determinant core.” (p. 258)

The corresponding spheres for the model are: the Core Sovereign Sphere, the Medial Sovereign Sphere, and the Ecto-Sovereign Sphere.

In the context of “ways of knowing,” the Mframadan Zimbabwe model conceptually provides a tiered differentiation between the inner and outer aspects of any entity or phenomena. This differentiation is physical, mental, and spiritual and provides for mediated ingress and egress from external to internal and vice versa.

Internally, these layers or spheres protect the essential core of an entity or phenomena from access, dilution, and superficial incorporation. It controls both the influx and outflux of knowledge, information and other media.

We understand that these co-axial spheres are a fundamental construction of an entity’s internal vs. external dynamic. As we seek to acquire knowledge, we are negotiating and navigating the Ecto and Medial sovereign spheres in a quest for “granted” access to the Core sovereign sphere and its arcane and essential “knowledge of being,” as well as being pulled into it’s set of internal relational dynamics.

In addition, we understand that as we are interacting with an entity, it is reciprocally negotiating and navigating our Ecto and Medial Sovereign spheres and seeking access to our Core. These cooperating and opposing kinetics function to mediate, ration, and contextualize our acquisition of knowledge, understanding, and insight. This framework recognizes that knowledge is layered and is acquired in cycles through a complex web of interconnected facets, vantage points, visions, and stages. We do not just know a “thing” at once by looking at it from one perspective. We must observe and interact with an entity as it moves through life, time, space and a multitude of experiences to achieve higher levels of knowledge, understanding, and interconnectedness.

The Dogon represents this quality of knowledge in four divisions: Giri So, Benne So, Bolo So, So Dayi. Each division represents a stage of knowing. The “Giri So,” or “fore-word,” is simplified knowledge. The knowledge of events and relationships seen at this level is simplified and deals with visible things; that are readily apparent. The “Benne So,” or “side-word,” contains the knowledge of the “Giri So” with more profound and broader explanations; it does not become apparent until other levels of knowledge are revealed (Martin, 2008). The “Bolo So,” or “back word,” proceeds further, completing the knowledge of the “Giri So” and “Benne So,” but it does not automatically reveal the secret parts (the core) (Martin, 2008). The “So Dayi,” or “clear-word,” is knowledge in its ordered complexity (Martin, 2008). We must cyclically engage these levels of knowledge repeatedly over time to converge at a qualitative understanding of an entity or phenomenon.

These Dogon divisions of knowledge correspond to the process of navigating the Mframadan Zimbabwe sovereign spheres of an entity or concept. The diagram below illustrates this convergence of the two conceptual systems.

Qualities of Existence

In the process of studying & gathering knowledge from the environment around us, it is crucial to recognize that the mandate to survive and develop is present in all existence. This mandate has three components or qualities of existence: Identity, Condition, & Objective. In The Sankofa Movement, these qualities of existence are defined as follows:

Identity — who or what is the active element (community, institution, family, personal, relational, etc.) is

Condition — the internal and external circumstance and history of encounters/situations involving the active element

Objective — The mission and goals of the active element (Akoto and Akoto, pg. 261)

For an entity to survive (further its existence), it must know who or what it is (Identity), its mission or purpose, its natural relationships, and what elements of its environment are conducive to its survival. Additionally, it must identify adverse relationships and interactions to its survival (Conditions) and development. It must maintain a memory (History) of those interactions and experiences that threaten its existence. As we seek to glean knowledge about any phenomenon and actively engage the phenomenon (entity), we must be mindful that we engage all three defining components of its existence. Furthermore, via the Mframadan Zimbabwe framework, we move carefully through the sovereign protective spheres developing relationships and seeking knowledge of the entity’s identity, conditions, and objectives.

Relevant Subjectivity

Subjectivity is an appropriate necessity in all of our studies, observations, and scientific methodologies. We seek and acknowledge subjectivity in all of our endeavors, methodologies, approaches, and research and we look to reflect “what we do” and “how we do” in a manner relevant to our people, conditions, world view, goals, and mission. From any entity’s viewpoint, the observable world is seen via a unique vantage point and is consistent with its values and beliefs. There is no objective study or endeavor. As Africans, we seek to be consistently African in our approach to understanding and interacting with our environment.

More insidious than the use of technology to oppress people is the institutionalization of a culture of belief in western science’s objectivity, western science’s neutrality, and western science’s universal contextualization of truth. These beliefs render us impotent in our quest to reclaim African control over our people’s mathematical and scientific genius and reclaim our traditional understanding of the universe.

Moreover, these western beliefs undermine African people’s ability to utilize our knowledge and skills to acquire and sustain our sovereignty, independence, and power. We recognize that knowledge emerges from a people’s worldview and is paradigmatically restricted by that worldview.

It is critical to understand that western science is a highly subjective system. Its discoveries are not “truths,” and its conclusions are not “facts”. Science is a paradigm, and it provides a way — one way — to view and understand the physical world.

We seek to develop and re-establish an African understanding of the physical-spiritual continuum and the relationships between forms of existence. This search for knowledge must be consistent with an underlying African worldview that is fundamentally based on a holistic ontological framework.

Dynamics of Repeatability

We recognize that the universe is rapidly changing every second and that these changes occur dynamically from minute aspects of microscopic existence to large-scale astronomical cycles and events. As we interact with an entity, we alter its existence and nature as we move within its environment. As we change it, we are changed. There are frequent psycho-emotional shifts in motivation, intent, beliefs, and physical-spiritual fluctuations in our environment that are often beyond our visual and conscious perception yet actively and consistently affecting the fabric of our existence. These rapidly changing dynamics challenge western notions of repeatability (i.e., expecting the same results given the same set of circumstances). Within an African scientific understanding, we recognize that “no two situations or circumstances are ever the same.

--

--