RESULT ANALYSIS

In this section, we argued that if we think of the concept of a person as a matter of strict ontological identity, we will see that communitarians conception is not necessarily the best way of talking of persons. We seek to argue that the communitarian conception is an ethical articulation of what persons ought to be as moral agents. The question of what persons ought to

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY

118

be as moral agents who are conceived in a communitarian set-up is quite different from the question of what persons are as ontological entities. According to Matolino,

to ascribe socio-ethical considerations to the entity of strict identity is erroneous. While it is not controversial at all to claim that morality and moral status is important to a person, we need to be careful in limiting what that importance is exactly supposed to be.

We should be careful to note that many things are important for persons, about persons and in persons; but not all things are important for the identity of persons. We cannot take things that are important for persons as living beings that have conscience and a moral sense and make those things important for persons subjects that can be distinctly identified as such. Socio-ethical descriptions of what persons do or what persons are supposed to do are not markers of what persons are. They indicate the capabilities that persons have certain range of considerations⁷⁸.

Similarly the Igbo people have the idea of onwe as the basis of personhood. According to Okere, It is not easy to figure out the complex relationship between these

elements and the Onwe, or with each other. Cumulatively however they make up. not Onwe itself, but the sum total of all the functions and actions attributed to Onwe. And if any new functions or activities are ever found, they will still be attributable to Onwe.

This goes to point out that Onwe is perhaps neither defined nor definable, but remains essentially the ultimate subject of all attributions. One can distinguish, but cannot separate, these functions, qualities and actions from their subject of attribution.

Neither can this subject be reduced to any one of them or any combination of them. The self/Onwe is neither this nor that attribution, but is rather the sovereign and ultimate proprietor of all attributions of the individual⁷⁹.

But the best way to start this discussion is to pick on a brief of what the question is really about.

When we are asked to identify what a person is we should endeavor to understand what the question is really asking us to do. The question can be put this way; what is a person?. This question is different from another question which can be put thus: what do persons do?. We can also come up with another question that will ask: how do persons understand themselves?. Or we

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY

119

could ask a different question such as; how do persons operate?. We could also ask, what do persons value? Or how do persons interact with each other?. We can say this class of questions is the how and what category.

We could develop another category of questions which we may call they why category. In this category we may ask questions such as:why do persons behave the way they do?‖ why do persons interact the way they do?. We could also ask: why do persons value this aspect of their existence over all others? or why do they believe in the things they do?. We could actually ask a lot of questions of this nature about persons.

The first set of questions which we have called the how and what category seeks to give certain features about persons as true to all persons. It tells us the composition of persons and fixes the kinds of things that they are. These questions point that the things they discuss are limited to persons. This type of discourse is different from the second category. The second category differs from the first in that it seeks to explain how the characteristics in category one are animated in the lives of persons. We can say that the first category asks about the kinds of things that persons are endowed with and the second category shows how those endowments translate into certain activities.

If we are correct therefore, what the communitarians have done is in line with the second category of questions. That is, why persons behave and are expected to behave in a certain way.

This aspect of a person does not fore-close others but very important aspects of the same person.

In fact, as a matter of importance, the first category of questions of how and what a person is precedes the second category of questions. According to Bujo, in many counties of Africa the process of the birth of a child consists of at least, two phases: the biological birth and the

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY

120

community birth⁸⁰. The first is linked to a joyful event of the little family and friends which still prolongs in a certain way the role of the maternal womb⁸¹. But veritable birth takes place when the child is given a name in front of the community⁸².

The point we want to make here is that the birth of a child is the beginning of the child‘s worth and with time, the child grows from stage to stage. And what the community does for the child is to initiate the child into the social values of the community so as to enjoy from the later worth of the child and forcibly, give social meaning and identity to the child‘s existence.