Ethical Responsibility for the Other Arrested by Epistemic Blindness, Deafness, and Muteness: An Ubuntu Perspective

Modu Wa Taba Motho ke motho ka batho ke molaotheo wa phedisano yeo e emego godimo ga thereso ya gore batho kamoka re a lekana ka goba motho esego ka maruo goba maemo setshabeng. Thereso ye e gapeletsa gore toka e be gona phedisanong. Ka go amogela tekano ya batho kamoka, thereso le toka ke tsona motheo wa phedisano ka khutso setshabeng le ditshaba-tshabeng. Ba gona batho bao ba gananang le molaotheo yo. Bona ba dira bjalo ka go iphetola difofu, difoa le dimumu ka boomo. Go dira bjalo ke go iphora. Ke go ganana le thereso. Taodiso ye e supa gore digananwa tse di somisa bofofu, bofoa le bomumu bjale ka setlhare sa ntshirela gore di se phethafatse molaotheo wa gore motho ke motho ka batho. Re fetleka bogananwa bjo re lebeletse gore na botho bjona bo bolela eng. The question of ethical responsibility for the other predates the christian question: “am I my brother’s keeper?” The present chapter proposes to examine this question from the perspective of the ethics of ubuntu. The ethics of ubuntu is invoked to achieve two interrelated purposes. One is to expose the argument that in the ontology of social being, ethical responsibility for the other is arrested by normalized epistemic blindness, deafness, and muteness for the benefit of all those who remain complacent with their imprisonment. Another is to challenge this argument on the ground of its ethical unsustainability. The outcome of the challenge is that historical truth has an important bearing on the quest for justice and peace in human relations. Conqueror South Africa will be the specific case of focus in this chapter. However, the argument may be applied to multiple and various situations of the indigenous peoples conquered in the unjust wars of colonization.