There is a dare need to understand peoples and cultures and resolve unending conflicts for better human relationship among people. To do this, this study seeks to find out whether the ontological being underlying Okolo"s African being-with is the same as that underlying Heidegger"s being-with (mitsein). The question raised is whether Africans share a common humanity with other human beings in the world, and if Heidegger"s presumption about the humanity of the African is true? What can the answers to these questions do in leadership and governance especially as the Nigerian election is in its full gear? The major aim of the study is to examine Okolo"s notion of African "being-with" in relation to Heidegger"s "being-with and highlight the rich ethical and political implications of their concepts through a cross-cultural dialogue and use it to advance a new ethical world order that promotes better living among peoples. The study finds that Africans and Europeans share a common humanity and that the understanding of Okolo and Heidegger"s notions of being-with can help not only improve mutual relationship but also leadership growth.

It is still debatable whether Nigeria (Africa) is the sole cause of its democratic and developmental challenges. While some argue that Europeans are Africa’s problem, others argue that Africans are their own problems. One of such developmental problems facing Africa and Nigeria particularly is exclusionism (simply, exclusion from rights or privileges or even both). Recently, Nigeria conducted its presidential election on February 25, 2023. The election witnessed lots of exclusion on the basis of party affiliation, ethnicity, location, and religion. It becomes pertinent to examine the basis for exclusionism and the role of the Enlightenment Era in the practice of exclusionism globally but in Nigeria particularly. This paper aims to identify the origin of [some form of] exclusionism in Africa through the lens of Nigeria. Critical thinking and analysis are applied as a method in arguing that exclusionism was scientifically and philosophically enshrined by the Enlightenment philosophers but had existed among Europeans and among traditional Africans (Africa before the colonization era). A recurrent factor in critical thinking and analysis is that exclusionism is part of human nature and this arises in the quest for power and control, to identify oneself as superior and the ‘other’ human being as inferior.

An obvious challenge facing Africa today is the developmental crisis. Even with the continents’ human and natural resources, Africa is still considered the most underdeveloped continent. What explanations can be given for this problem? What really is the central causative factor to Africa’s underdevelopment? Some scholars blame it on African predicaments like the slave trade, colonialism, neo-colonialism, etc, and for some others Africa underdeveloped Africa which can be proved through Donald Davidson’s standard action theory which proposes that the notion of intentional action is more fundamental than the notion of action and that there is a close connection between intentional action and acting for a reason (belief+desire). This paper argues that though the African predicaments play a strong, devastating role that facilitated developmental backwardness, but the blame should today squarely be put on Africans themselves or otherwise Africans are denied agency and autonomy. Expectations from the paper are the exposition of the weakness of the African political class towards political will to truly serve as the cause of the situation, and of how Davidson’s theory of action could resolve the ugly situation. By adopting critical thinking, analytical and expository methods, the paper reinstates that African politicians and governments should be held accountable for Africa’s underdevelopment.

This paper is an attempt to respond to Okolo’s position that African philosophy emerged at the African-European contact. For Okolo, there was what could be referred to, as expressions of philosophic tendencies which were not philosophy _per se_, called ‘Philosophy in Africa’ which has existed in Africa. They could be explained as basic cultural expressions of the people. But real philosophy characterized by critical reflection began after the Second World War when Africans must have attained some level of formal education and critical reflection, hence ‘African Philosophy’. But then, questions arise: ‘Why, in the first place, questioning African Philosophy but not religion, arts, politics, etc.? Why must African Philosophy, the expression of African-wisdom, be a product of African-European contact? A clear problem in Okolo’s position is the affirmation that everything African, especially the essence of being-African which he designates with the term ‘being-with’ is either non-African-originated, not really a humanistic philosophy or European originated. This paper defends the thesis that ‘being’ implicates the ‘facticity of existence’ which is the central focus of philosophy, and once there ‘is’ in Africa before the African-European contact, there ‘is’ ‘philosophy’ in its real sense. This paper is expected to (1) analyze and expose Okolo’s thought and weaknesses, (2) address the issue of periodization of the African Philosophy hence the position that philosophy has always existed but systems and schools of philosophizing can be found in times, (3) postulate that what is African can commendably sustain Africa. The paper shall adopt philosophical conceptual and contextual analysis and clarifications.