Paulin Hountondji on Western Epistemic Dominance and the Problem of Scientific Dependence in Africa

Resumen

The question of Western epistemic dominance continues to dominate discourses on African philosophy. During the Great Debate in African philosophy, the position of Ethno-philosophers was more or less to project an African epistemic narrative against the prevailing Western epistemic discourse at the time. On the other hand, critiques of Ethno-philosophers (otherwise known as the Universalists of which Hountondji was a chief proponent) were also of the view that, Ethno-philosophers were playing the rhythm of Eurocentrism. The Universalists were also accused of criticizing without producing credible alternative. In either divide of the argument, the central focus has been on the challenge of Western epistemic dominance. Western epistemic dominance could be said to have created scientific dependence in Africa. Many decades after the Great Debate, one still asks: To what extent has the problem of Western epistemic dominance been addressed by Africans? Is there any relationship between Western epistemic dominance and African scientific dependence on the west? Is African scientific dependence internally created by Africans or externally manipulated? Has Hountondji's concern on African scientific dependence been addressed? Paulin Hountondji has been a consistent voice in addressing this problem. The focus of this paper is to consider these challenges anew and to see how far the problem has been addressed. Using the hermeneutic method, the paper argued that the problem of western epistemic dominance can only be addressed through the creation of credible and competitive alternative scientific knowledge by Africans.