Claiming force equals being makes the Bantu ontology a mere tautology

Evidence

This philosophy is ontology of vital forces. In the history of Western philosophy, starting from the Pre-Socratic philosophers, the nature of reality has been described in terms of a static conception of being, by the use of set phrases such as “the reality that is,” “anything that exists,” or “what is.” This may be largely so in Western philosophy, but it is not universally so. Tempels does not accept this static conception of being. Instead, he attributes to the Bantu a dynamic conception of being, an ontology in which being is conceived as “vital force” The universe can be described as an interrelation of forces within the whole of existence. — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 526 (#responds-to, via linked claim)

This ontology is related to both a spiritual as well as a material world, and these could be discerned, but they are not separate. The Bantu philosophy is a holistic way of thinking, starting from the idea that all life experiences are being determined by the totality of vital force. The holistic paradigm goes beyond typical Western dichotomies, such as spirit and matter, transcendent and immanent, visible and invisible. Characteristic of Bantu philosophical concepts is an ontology vitally connected to a Supreme Being, ancestor spirits, living beings, animals, plants and matter. They all exist in a universe of vital force, whose origin is religious. As Tempels stated: “Force is the nature of being, force is being, being is force” (Tempels, 1969, p. 51). — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 812 (#complicates, via linked claim)

I apologize for this long quotation, but it permits me to bring out some possibilities of black men’s mistakes. Alioune Diop, for example, in his introduction to La philosophic bantoue, remarks that Bantu ontology knows nothing of the metaphysical misery of Europe. The inference that he draws from this is none the less dangerous: … Be careful! It is not a matter of finding Being in Bantu thought, when Bantu existence subsists on the level of nonbeing, of the imponderable. It is quite true that Bantu philosophy is not going to open itself to understanding through a revolutionary will: But it is precisely in that degree in which Bantu society, being a closed society, does not contain that substitution of the exploiter for the ontological relations of Forces. Now we know that Bantu society no longer exists. And there is nothing ontological about segregation. Enough of this rubbish. — Frantz Fanon, Constance Farrington, Black skin, white masks, 652 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim
• XREF: connects to: Force is the fundamental category defining existence and growth for the Muntu; Bantu ontology is grounded in vital force rather than Being — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 526; Bantu ontology is holistic and unified through vital force, transcending Western dualisms — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 812 (+2 more)

Related

• Bantu ontology is grounded in vital force rather than Being (similarity 0.93)
• Bantu ontology is holistic and unified through vital force, transcending Western dualisms (similarity 0.92)
• Bantu vital forces form a hierarchy from God down through ancestors to animals (similarity 0.89)
• Bantu philosophy is the religious and ethical thought of the Bantu peoples. (similarity 0.89)
• Western and Bantu philosophies differ in static versus dynamic conceptions of being. (similarity 0.87)
• For Bantu, being is inseparable from force, a transcendental unity Westerners can split (similarity 0.86)
• Rendering Bantu being as mere possession of force misstates their ontology. (similarity 0.85)
• Western ontology and African vitalogy can engage in reciprocal dialogue (similarity 0.85)
• Ntumba held that construing Bantu force as Western being imposed foreign categories (similarity 0.85)
• For the Bantu, force is not an attribute of beings but their very nature. (similarity 0.84)
• Tempels equated African Vital Force with Western philosophical Being (similarity 0.84)
• Force is the fundamental category defining existence and growth for the Muntu (similarity 0.84)
• Tempels’ force ontology made African philosophy a Bantustan philosophy (similarity 0.84)
• Tempels himself equated Bantu force with European being in his own text (similarity 0.83)
• Tempels equated African force with Western being and misconstrued its meaning (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Bantu ontology is grounded in vital force rather than Being #responds-to (0.75) — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 526
• Bantu ontology is holistic and unified through vital force, transcending Western dualisms #complicates (0.55) — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 812
• Praising Bantu ontology masks the destruction of Bantu society by segregation. #qualifies (0.40) — Frantz Fanon, Constance Farrington, Black skin, white masks, 652