‘I am of Popper’, ‘I am of Asante’: The Polemics of Scholarship in South Africa


In this article, I examine the state of knowledge construction within the South African academe. This, I do by looking at how issues of epistemology and ontology are prioritised or negated in the social construction of knowledge. Focusing on what I have called ‘the problem of perspectives’, I show how ‘epistemological narcissism’ has often limited the scope of methodological and theoretical innovativeness. I argue that by relying on a set of certain theories that scholars have known and used over the years, and dismissing those that are considered ‘foreign’ (or non-African), the exercise of knowledge construction has become largely polemical.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Following these protests, at UCT for example, a campus wide Curriculum Change Working Group (CCWG) was established by the Vice Chancellor to explore ways of decolonising the curriculum.

  2. 2.

    Mbembe (2015). ‘Decolonizing Knowledge and the Question of the Archive’. Available from: https://wiser.wits.ac.za/system/files/Achille%20Mbembe%20-%20Decolonizing%20Knowledge%20and%20the%20Question%20of%20the%20Archive.pdf.

  3. 3.

    I owe my use of the notion of “seductive appeal” to the work of Alvesson, Ashcraft and Thomas (2008).

  4. 4.

    Coloniality is defined as “an invisible power structure that sustains colonial relations and domination long after the direct end of colonialism” (Ndlovu-Gatsheni 2012: 1). It differs from colonialism in the sense that, colonialism refers to a “political arrangement that has existed since time immemorial” (Maldonado-Torres 2017: 117). Drawing on this distinction, decolonisation needs to be then construed as a “political, epistemological and liberatory project” (Ndlovu-Gatsheni 2012: 1). As we shall see, the distinction between ‘coloniality’ and ‘colonialism’ is crucial in all the discussions around curriculum change in South Africa. Evidently, such discussions and calls have failed to separate these two from each other leading to ontological difficulties.

  5. 5.

    I argue here that one of the dangers of epistemological narcissism lies in the way it leads scholars to have some kind of bias towards their own preferred epistemological traditions. Elsewhere in literature, this is often referred to as “epistemological bias” (Howe 2002: 95).


  1. Alvesson, M., L. Ashcraft, and R. Thomas. 2008. Identity Matters: Reflections on the Construction of Identity Scholarship in Organization Studies. Organization 15 (1): 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Asante, M.K. 1990. Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Asante, M.K. 1991. The Afrocentric Idea in Education. Journal of Negro Education 60: 170–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asante, M.K. 2003. The Afrocentric Idea. In The Afrocentric Paradigm, ed. A. Mazama, 37–54. Asmara: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Asante, M.K. 2007. An Afrocentric Manifesto: Toward an African Renaissance. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cobb, W. 1997. Out of Africa: The Dilemmas of Afrocentricity. The Journal of Negro History 82 (1): 122–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Creswell, J.W. 2012. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Curriculum Change Working Group (CCWG). 2018. Curriculum Change Framework. Cape Town: University of Cape Town.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dastile, N.P. 2017. Beyond Euro-Western dominance: An African-centred decolonial paradigm. Africanus: Journal of Development Studies 43 (2): 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Geertz, C. 1974. “From the Native’s Point”: On the Nature of Anthropological Understanding. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 28 (1): 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hacking, I. 1999. The Social Construction of What?. London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harris, N. 2003. A Philosophical Basis for an Afrocentric Orientation. In The Afrocentric Paradigm, ed. A. Mazama, 111–120. Asmara: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Howe, K.R. 2002. On the Threat of Epistemological Bias. In Closing Methodological Divides: Toward Democratic Educational Research, ed. K.R. Howe, 95–110. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Karenga, M. 2003. Afrocentricity and Multicultural Education: Concept, Challenge and Contribution. In The Afrocentric Paradigm, ed. A. Mazama, 73–94. Asmara: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kaschula, R.H. 2016. In Search of the African Voice in Higher Education: The Language Question. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus 49: 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. King, J.E., and E.E. Swartz. 2018. Heritage Knowledge in the Curriculum: Retrieving an African Episteme. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhn, T.S. 1982. Commensurability, Comparability, Communicability. Proceedings of the Biannual Meeting of the Philosophy of Science, Volume Two (Symposia and Invited Papers) (pp. 669–688). https://philpapers.org/rec/KUHCCC-2. Accessed February 3, 2019.

  19. Lefkowitz, M. 1997. Not out of Africa: How “Afrocentrism” Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History. New York: Basic Groups.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Maldonado-Torres, N. 2017. On the Coloniality of Human Rights. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais 114: 117–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mazama, A. 2001. The Afrocentric Paradigm: Contours and Definitions. Journal of Black Studies 31 (4): 387–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mazama, A. 2003. The Afrocentric Paradigm. Asmara: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mbembe, A. 2015. Decolonizing Knowledge and the Question of the Archive. https://wiser.wits.ac.za/system/files/Achille%20Mbembe%20%20Decolonizing%20Knowledge%20and%20the%20Question%20of%20the%20Archive.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2019.

  24. Mignolo, W.D. 2010. Epistemic Disobedience, Independent Thought and Decolonial Freedom. Theory, Culture & Society 26 (7–8): 159–181.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Narayan, K. 1993. How Native is a “Native” Anthropologist? American Anthropologist 95 (3): 671–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. 2012. Coloniality of Power in Development Studies and the Impact of Global Imperial Designs on Africa. Inaugural lecture, University of South Africa. http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/8548/Inugural%20lecture16%20October%202012.pdf.pdf.

  27. Oyedemi, T. 2018. (De) coloniality and South African Academe. Critical Studies in Education (Online version of Record). https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2018.1481123.

  28. Popper, K. 2002. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Quijano, A. 2007. Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality. Cultural Studies 21 (2–3): 168–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Saldana, J. 2011. Fundamentals of Qualitative Research: Understanding Qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sewall, G.T. 1996. A Conflict of Visions: Multiculturalism and the Social Studies. In Public Education in a Multicultural Society: Policy, Theory, Critique, ed. R.F. Fullinwider, 49–64. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Williams, C.J. 2005. In Defense of Materialism: A Critique of Afrocentric Ontology. Race & Class 47 (1): 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tawanda Sydesky Nyawasha.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nyawasha, T.S. ‘I am of Popper’, ‘I am of Asante’: The Polemics of Scholarship in South Africa. Stud Philos Educ 39, 415–428 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-019-09688-7

Download citation


  • Polemics
  • Afrocentric
  • Knowledge production
  • Epistemology
  • Euro-American
  • African diaspora