Curry argued that the recent rise of liberalism in the modern academy has allowed us to examine and cite the works of Africana philosophy insofar as they highlight the ‘inadequacies of traditional European thought’. Africana philosophy, in other words, has begun to enjoy increasing validation for its critique of the Anglo-European past. But, because it comes with tacit prejudices deeply rooted in the very tradition it criticises, which still dictates the terms of what counts as philosophical discussions, the whole process of integrating Black thinkers into the traditionally white/Western-style academy ends up validating what European philosophy thinks of as the proper form of being human (or any other major conceptions in philosophy). In other words, by reading the works of Black thinkers, our faith in the white establishment and white philosophy paradoxically increases, and the potential impact of radical philosophy is softened and turned into a kind of ‘racial therapy’ for Western philosophers.
Takeshi Morisato, 2026, from the article “Epistemic convergence in the study of world philosophies”
I’ve always found Tommy Curry’s ideas interesting as he stands virtually solo with respects to his ideas about Black men in Western civilization. This essay is essentially a review of an article written by Curry in 2011 that refers to a concept called “epistemic convergence”. I guess that’s a fancy philosophical way to refer to the co-opting of radical ideas into the mainstream of Western philosophy.
A comment from an apparent former colleague of Curry’s, Gregory Pappas, reads:
I also do not think this is, at the end of the day. all that important compare to the forms of domination, racism, xenophobia, lynching happening in “the streets” and outside of the academic world and professional academic philosophy. I mean, does fixing “epistemic convergence” or even departments and disciplines is all that consequential to concrete lives and non-academic communuties?
This is a good question to ask and highlights one of my main gripes with critical theory as a methodology. The obvious issue, at least to me it seems, is a lack of thoroughgoingness from the so-called ‘radical’ non-Western-minded thinkers. I mean how far did DuBois, Fanon, Newton, etc. really go with their thinking? Is it just enough to say, “Bad, white man” and be applauded and acquiesced to?
Do people have any idea about how to transform their supported transformative brand of virtue into action?
«