Most of you probably don’t know what Ubuntu is, and if you think you do, let me clarify: I’m not talking about the Linux operating system. No, I’m talking about the African Philosophy.
The word "Ubuntu" comes from one of the Bantu dialects of Southern Africa.
Broken down in simplest terms, Ubuntu is a philosophical belief in the cohesion of positive human interaction. It’s the ethical responsibility that flows from interconnectedness and common humanity. Basically, the existence of human interaction is the basis for Ubuntu.
When we reach a little deeper to examine “ethical responsibility” between “common humanity,” we find the largest question to be: what is our ethical responsibility as human beings? Then what is ethical? Morality can define ethics, but morality itself is subjective in the outskirts of its meaning. However, I believe its core can be agreed upon: no matter what you believe the “right” thing to do is, morality is your correct behavior in any given situation. This is where Ubuntu makes a leap because it takes a decisive path on the topic; its moral code is affirming openness. It is essentially the opposite of schadenfreude. For those of you who don’t know what that is, get some goddamn culture and watch a musical, specifically Avenue Q. I promise that you’ll love it. I’ll tell you what schadenfreude is though: happiness at the misfortune of others. Ubuntu exercises affirmation towards others. In practice you would not feel threatened that others are able and good because you understand that you belong to a greater whole. Ubuntu philosophers are lessened when others are humiliated. When others fail, practitioners of Ubuntu are not elated by it; they suffer as the failure suffers because they see it as a greater whole, which encompasses them so they indirectly failed too.
When we reach a little deeper to examine “ethical responsibility” between “common humanity,” we find the largest question to be: what is our ethical responsibility as human beings? Then what is ethical? Morality can define ethics, but morality itself is subjective in the outskirts of its meaning. However, I believe its core can be agreed upon: no matter what you believe the “right” thing to do is, morality is your correct behavior in any given situation. This is where Ubuntu makes a leap because it takes a decisive path on the topic; its moral code is affirming openness. It is essentially the opposite of schadenfreude. For those of you who don’t know what that is, get some goddamn culture and watch a musical, specifically Avenue Q. I promise that you’ll love it. I’ll tell you what schadenfreude is though: happiness at the misfortune of others. Ubuntu exercises affirmation towards others. In practice you would not feel threatened that others are able and good because you understand that you belong to a greater whole. Ubuntu philosophers are lessened when others are humiliated. When others fail, practitioners of Ubuntu are not elated by it; they suffer as the failure suffers because they see it as a greater whole, which encompasses them so they indirectly failed too.
The Zulus (a tribe in South Africa) have a saying: "Umuntu Ngumuntu Ngabantu", which means that a person is a person through other persons.
Through Ubuntu we affirm our humanity when we acknowledge that of others.
So what sort of take does Ubuntu have on the concepts of jealousy or ownership. Since these feelings happen, how does it propose we deal with them?
ReplyDeleteInteresting prospective indeed!
ReplyDelete"However, I believe its core can be agreed upon: no matter what you believe the “right” thing to do is, morality is your correct behavior in any given situation." - This seem redundant; however, defining morality is devoid of the article's point. As for Gamma's question, I simply wouldn't know. Although, I would like to!
Damn it Johnathan. Perspective*
ReplyDeleteI also feel defining morality as the correct behavior in any given situation is rather self-defeating. Similar to justifying murder as wrong because it's "taking a life." No shit, right?
Morality is such a difficult concept to tackle, especially for those of us that have declared God is dead--so to speak. It leaves us at "everything is permissible." Of course, we all know that's not true, but we're always left with the question "Why?"