Public discourse in our time is increasingly marred by intellectual arrogance, individuals who weaponize knowledge, belittle opposing views, and silence constructive criticism. Yet the foundation of true intellectual engagement rests not on dominance but on humility. Before exploring the failures of modern discourse, it is worth recalling a personal example of leadership grounded in principle and respect.
I am profoundly proud of my father, though many may never fully grasp the depth of that pride. He instilled in his children the virtues of humility, principled assertiveness, and an aversion to arrogance. One admirable quality about my father, G. A. K. Fudzi, was his remarkable ability to stoop to everyone’s level not to diminish himself, but to understand others. He sought knowledge diligently, applied it conscientiously, and lived by the principles he established for his household.
My father never condemned, shouted at, or insulted anyone simply because their opinion diverged from his. Even when we erred, he would first sit with us, discuss the matter thoroughly, and help us see why we had gone wrong before any form of discipline followed. Crucially, he never crafted rules he himself would not obey. He made clear what was meant for adults and what was appropriate for children. Above everything, whenever he erred, he was never too proud to say, “I am sorry.” This simple yet profound humility continues to guide my adult life, my professional conduct, and my intellectual engagements.
From a social science perspective, I have learned that every meaningful conversation begins with a premise and is anchored by guiding principles. Based on that premise, one arrives at a conclusion. Should you deviate or commit an error in your argument, anyone with the requisite understanding has the mandate to point it out. Age, seniority, or the number of certificates one holds does not alter this basic intellectual truth.
Yet today, many African intellectuals; those from whom we expect rigor often fail to live by the very principles they teach. They articulate frameworks for constructive dialogue but abandon those frameworks the moment they step into the arena of public discourse. When their inconsistencies are highlighted, they often shift from addressing content to attacking personalities, resorting to insults and labels rather than reason and evidence.
A timeless principle I learned from Moral Philosophy and Theories of Justice states: “Whatever rule you make for others, you must be willing to abide by yourself. Do not impose a rule on others that you cannot obey.” When I compare this to my father’s life, it becomes clear that he was not only spiritually grounded but morally refined. Had he possessed the level of formal education he so passionately encouraged in his children, his influence on society and intellectual culture would have been even more remarkable.
Today, we encounter individuals with multiple degrees and accolades who, by all expectations, should embody the very ideals they advocate. Instead, many engage in what I describe as “intellectual bush burning”, moving goalposts, dismissing others condescendingly, and projecting an aura of infallibility. Their tone often communicates, “I know it all, and you may not challenge me.” And should anyone dare to disagree, they are met with insults rather than intellectual debate.
This attitude, I believe, is a residue of an outdated paternalistic mindset inherited from some of our forebears, one that must be unlearned. Students of Western philosophy will recall that Socrates, though unmatched in reasoning, never dismissed others for holding opposing views. Instead, he highlighted flaws in their reasoning with clarity and humility. His approach laid the foundation for what would become the philosophical tradition; the relentless search for wisdom.
Intellectual discourse is, at its core, an exchange of perspectives rooted in facts and reason. Everyone has the right to contribute their view to national discourse, based on available evidence. And if one deviates from the facts, anyone regardless of age, rank, or certificates should be able to correct them respectfully. Let us therefore commit to living by the principles we profess. When you are wrong, acknowledge it. Do not behave as though you are the sole custodian of all knowledge.
In the end, intellectual discourse thrives not on dominance but on humility, honesty, and a willingness to learn. My father’s life taught me that true wisdom is lived, not proclaimed; practiced, not performed. If we hope to build healthier spaces for dialogue; online and offline, we must reject intellectual bullying, embrace respectful engagement, and hold ourselves to the same standards we expect of others. No one knows it all, and acknowledging this truth is the first step toward genuine understanding. Peace.
Author: Moses A. Katamani
Email: infomoskambel@gmail.com
Website: www.kambelconsult.com