

























229 

17 

MAN, RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY: 
TOWARDS A NORMATIVE VISION OF THE 

HUMAN PERSON 
 

Anthony Ifechukwude AKALUE 
Department of Philosophy, 

Seminary of All Saints, 
Uhiele-Ekpoma, Edo State 
ifechukwuderev@yahoo.com 

   
Abstract 
This paper seeks to give a formidable normative structure that is geared 
towards human development. This is premised on the fact that the 
human person has a composite nature. That is, man, having a material 
and a spiritual nature. These natures cum dimensions in the human 
person does not in any way reduce the religio-cultural and social 
dimension of the human person. In fact, they enhance it the more. This 
paper argues that man is yet to fully realize some level of satisfaction in 
the way it relates with its fellow human being as a social being; this is 
evident in the different crimes against humanity that are perpetuated 
everyday for instance, abuse of minors, rape, robbery and other sexist 
practices. These anomalies are still very much evident in the religious 
palace wherein religion that ought to give a kind of solace to humanity, is 
being used as a tool for exploitation thereby creating an unhealthy 
religious belief system in the way religious beliefs are being handled. The 
paper further argues that the human person will only progress if there is 
a perfect use of reason to actualize his belief system, and further 
enhances the best way to relate well with his fellow human being. This is 
where the irreplaceable tools of philosophy come in as it will help in no 
small measure in sharpening the belief system of the human person on 
how to leave a sound life in the society and to get rid of the unhealthy 
sexist tendencies, abuses of minor and other atrocities. 
 
Keywords: Man, Religion, Society, Philosophy, Ethics, Interactionism 
 



230 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

Introduction 
The different theories on the origin of mankind like that of Charles 
Darwin, Big Bang, Creation story of the Semitic tradition as recorded in 
the Holy Bible and a host of others, have presented an aspect of the 
human person that cannot be denied by any successive theories. This 
aspect is the fact that the human person is a social being that interacts. 
Many social institutions like the family, school, age grade, political party 
and so on, have laid credence to this fact. In other words, the different 
evolutionary theories have further proven that the human person is a 
relational being. As the human person continues to evolve, this 
relationship continues to spread also; both from the vertical perspective 
and the horizontal perspective. This simply means that man who is a 
social being is also a religious being; this is where his vertical relationship 
with the Supreme Being is also a cause for concern. This is so because it 
is believed that the Supreme Being has strong influence in the daily 
growth of the human person and as such, an effective relationship with 
him becomes expedient. 

Be that as it may, there are certain actions and activities that have 
posited threats to the sincerity of these interactions and relationships 
judging from the fact of negative socio-religious trends: where the 
human person no longer values the sanctity of their relationship with the 
Supreme Being; where people use the name of the Supreme Being to 
cajole and deceive people; where human beings no longer have fear of 
the sacred and of sacred places; where humanity no longer appreciates 
the uniqueness of their interaction and relationship with their fellow 
beings. While some have tailored these disappointing acts to modernism, 
some others have said that all of these atrocities have long been there and 
as such there is no remedy.  

The question now is, is it really true there is no remedy to the 
atrocities that have threatened peaceful coexistence? Can there be a 
remedy to the way people are easily deceived to do things in the name of 
the Supreme? Can human relationship ever improve in the light of 
modernism? Or is it the case that the older the crime, the somewhat 
impossibility of a solution? Now, this work does not intend to dwell on 
what has been in the past and in the present but to suggest that there is a 
remedy in view. This remedy is borne out by the rich tools of philosophy 
as a normative discipline that helps in interrogating certain anomalies in 
the society. 

 The method to be adopted in this work is speculative, 
prescriptive and critical. A close look at the methods that will be 
employed in this work shows that they are methods that are sole 
exclusive of philosophy.  



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    231 

However, let it be known here that the use of the term ‘man’ is 
for both sexes. It means human kind or human being as the case may be. 
These are names that are all inclusive, in embracing both sexes-male and 
female of this species of organisms, known by the biological name of 
Homo Sapiens1. Following, the descriptive dimension of man, dualists 
holds that man is a composite being that is made of matter and spirit. 
This means that man is believed to have a material body and a non-
material soul. While, the dualists are of the view that both dimension of 
man are parallel, the integrationists say that both dimension constitute 
one substance, man. Be that as it may, the underlining truth is that man 
who has a material aspect, is known to have a vital force that is non-
material.  
 
Man and the Society: 
Three sociological theories will help present the path through which this 
aspect will be taken. The sociological theories are structural 
functionalism, symbolic interactionism and conflict theory. There is no 
doubt these theories have their shortcomings because of their adherence 
to scientific principles and methods. However, attention will be paid to 
their sociological principles and how they apply to societal interactions. 

Structural functionalism depicts the society as a social system 
consisting of various structures, organizations and institutions, 
influencing each other and affecting the whole system. It focuses on the 
function of the institutions and their contribution to the continuity of 
the social system.2 This theory is suggestive of the function or the role an 
organization play in the growth of a society.  

Symbolic Interactionism is interested to know how an individual 
acquires personal and social characteristics, in particular, self-identity. 
The theory concludes its assertion that people were not born with the 
sense of the self. They acquire it through interaction that takes place 
between them in the society3. There is no doubt, therefore, that this 
places primacy on the indispensable role of the society as it is the one 
that is responsible in forming the self-identity of the human person 

Conflict Theory presents society as an arena of widespread 
conflict and struggle at every level of it. Thus, conflict theory sees society 
to be structured on the patterns that retain the discriminatory status quo. It 
favours some sides and side-lines others. However, the aspect of conflict 
theory that will be of utmost concern here, is the one that is open to 
reconciliation in the area of conflict resolution; wherein parties disagree 
to agree. 

A close look at all of these theories, show the reality of 
interaction and how the society is necessary for the growth and 
development of the human person. It shows the strength to which every 



232 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

institution is built. These theories carries with them a normative 
character in that the society or if you like the community has a strong 
influence in determining the integrity of the human person.  

Man we all know is a social animal. The reality of this assertion is 
in its ability to be able to interact with its fellow peers. The different 
areas of socialization are fully suggestive of this reality in the human 
person. Primarily, man learns cultural discipline and societal norms from 
the family community which is very important for influencing the 
human person. 

Sociologists have postulated different theories of society. This 
ranges from the fact that the society is a structurally built system that 
helps to empower the human person in ascertaining his set goals. A close 
look at most of the theories of societal development, will help discover 
that it is centered on the human person. A. Spirkin itemized collective 
interactions that further strengthens man’s existence in the society. 
According to him, they include the family, the play or instruction 
groups, the production team and other types of formal and informal 
collectivity.4 It is important to note that the family plays an important 
role in the psychological development of the human person. The family 
is a crucial instrument for the development of personality. This is 
because it is here that the child first comes to know about the basics of 
existence. In other words, it is here that the child first becomes involved 
in social life, absorbs its values and standards of behavior, it ways of 
thought, language and certain value orientations. From the family, the 
child finds itself in some other association as he grows older.  

Apart from the family, other groups and institutions play 
significant roles in the social development of the human person. These 
groups or associations have a way of influencing an individual’s 
personality whether for good or for bad but one thing that is sure, is the 
fact of an influence. Such a group can be the school institution or peer 
group. All these are societal institution that the human person cannot shy 
away from because they produce a kind of interaction that is needed in 
human development. In the different schools for instance, they meet 
another level of interaction under the influence of non-family members. 
This is not to say the family level of socialization is in sharp contrast to 
this institution’s form of socialization rather, both run concurrently in 
that the child while in school realizes that they are judged by their 
performance and no longer being accepted unconditionally. This is 
where a partial level of independence emerges from the human person. 
This is so because they learn a new culture that extends beyond their 
narrow family culture. This new culture requires a high level of efforts in 
learning outside the scope of a family but to the wider community. 
Upon finishing from this institution, are lunched into a more intense 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    233 

level of socialization that sees them responsible for forming and building 
the interaction of younger generation. Here most of them are lunched 
into the life of full adulthood in marriages, work and even colleges. Here 
they take full responsibilities for all their actions.  

The human person is a being that is always in touch with his 
environment or society as the case may be. This is why it is impossible to 
separate an individual from the society; because the individual is a 
product of the society. Their relationship is very cordial. The individual 
lives and acts within the society. Man is biologically and psychologically 
equipped to live in the society. This is where the social life of the 
individual is formed; F.M Anayet Hossain & M. D. Korban Ali note that 
“social life are dependent on the following such as  political life, 
economic life, voluntary associations, educational associations, method of 
communications and family 5. This is why man is at the center of every 
political system like the unitary or parliamentary system. This same also 
holds way in the economic palace where man is at the center of every 
economic policies like socialism, capitalism, communism and 
communalism. Man is said to have survived all of these economic 
systems in their own uniqueness. 

Man, who is a social being, is said to be religious too. In fact, 
some scholars refer to man as a religious animal. Some traditions and 
culture have opined that you cannot separate religion from their 
ontology. For instance, the Africans see themselves as notoriously 
religious. The question now is what is this religious dimension of man 
all about? This will bring to bare another important aspect of this work.  
 
Religion and Man  
Since the main thrust of this work is to build up a healthy religio-social 
dimension of the human person, it is fitting that having discussed man 
and his place in the society, man and the notion of religion be also 
explicated. 

The word religion means different things to different people 
since there is no universally accepted definition of religion. However, 
from its etymology, the word religion according to Bernard Haring is 
derived from three Latin words as its root namely, ligare which means ‘to 
bind’ relegare which means to unite, or to link and religio which means 
relationship”6. From the etymology, one can immediately see that the 
underlining truth about the term religion is that it has to do with 
interaction that fosters relationship in order to bind and to link people 
together. However, the link or relationship here is one that exist between 
a person and a supreme being that is believed to exist. This divine 
Supreme Being that is transcendent is an object of worship by the human 



234 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

person. This is what truly constitutes the essence of religion as Joseph 
Omoregbe argues: 
Religion is essentially a bi-polar phenomenon. On the one end is man 
(religious man) while on the other end is the transcendent being, the 
deity he believes to exist and which he worships. Whether such a deity 
really exists or simply the figment of his imagination of the religious man 
is not important to the concept of religion, as long as the deity is really 
believed by the religious man to actually exist. For him, the deity is a 
reality. The concept of deity is essential to the concept of religion. 
Hence, where a belief in a deity is lacking, there can be no religion since 
religion, as we have said, is essentially a relationship established between 
man and a deity, that is, a transcendent personal being, believed to exist.7 

The point therefore is that religion carries with it a relationship 
between man and the Supreme. This simply means that the truth of 
religion is centred on the existence of a Supreme Being that is 
transcendent. This Supreme Being is said to be very powerful in that it 
can determine the life of man to a very large extent. Since this is possible, 
man is supposed to have good rapport with the Him by a sincere worship 
of Him. This is where some persons also feel that religion is also a 
human activity. This is because religion also affects the human person. 
The belief and reliance on the Supreme Being is an indication of the 
limitations and weaknesses of the human person. This worship and 
appeal done to the Supreme Being further shows man’s dependence. 
This is where Gallowaay’s definition of religion becomes necessary. 
According to him, “religion is man’s faith in a power beyond himself 
whereby he seeks to satisfy emotional needs and gains stability of life, 
and where he expresses in acts of worship and service”8 

Religion is likened to a law that is inseparable from man’s nature 
just as the laws of physics and life are inseparable from matter and living 
beings. This is because the Supreme Being who is believed to be the 
creator of the world (as evident in many traditions), has given man the 
longing for his creator and directed man towards him. Ever since the 
history of mankind began, man has been practicing different forms of 
worship and piety. In fact, some scholars say there was no nation on the 
earth that was unattached to a religion and performing its rites in one-
way or another. This is because piety is an instinct, a natural feeling 
deeply rooted in man’s being. It can neither be hushed, nor muted in an 
individual’s conscience, nor can the human conscience be prevented 
from sensing it, or going towards it9 

Different theories have been postulated for the evolution of 
religion. We have the sociological, psychological theories of religion and 
anthropological theories of religion. The Anthropological theory of 
Religion is propagated by Ludwig Feuerbach in his work, The Essence of 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    235 

Christianity. Here, he states that religion is the creation of man and 
worship of a projected human self. This projection of himself is a 
product of the mystery of religion where one seeks help from a higher 
being. For Feuerbach, the higher being that is projected is man himself 
whose good deeds or evil deeds are not indifferent to God. He argues 
thus: 
Man- this is the mystery of religion- projects his being into objectivity, 
and then again makes himself an object to this projected image of himself 
thus converted into a subject; he thinks of himself, but as the object of an 
object, of another being than himself. Thus, here, man is an object to 
God. That man is good or evil is not indifferent to God.10 
 

The Psychological theory of Religion is advocated by Sigmund 
Freud in his works, Totem and Taboo (1913), The Future of an Illusion 
(1927), and Moses and Monotheism  (1939). In all of these works, Freud 
argues that religion is a projection of man's childhood neurosis, the 
continual need of a Father and a reflection of infantile mentality. This 
simply means that for Freud, religion projects man's inability to grow up; 
it is like a puerile fixation and stagnancy where man depends on his 
parents for everything and this have so affected him that he has extended 
this dependency to an unknown Supreme Being for help.  
 There exist different sociological theories of religion, but the most 
prominent of them is in the works of E. B. Tylor tiltled, Primitive Culture 
(1871) and Emile Durkheim's, Elementary forms of Religion (1912). Tylor 
concludes that religion evolves from ancestor worship. He says: "using 
the phrase ancestor worship in its broadest sense, as comprehending all 
worship of the dead, be the of the same blood or not, we conclude that 
ancestor worship is the root of every religion"11. Joseph Omoregbe states 
that religion for Emile Durkheim, is a principle of control by the society 
to continually dominate her citizens. It is the principle of influence, 
which personified social forces of control in society into a god with all 
the attributes of society as its qualities12.   

Giving the fact that these three theories of religion are of 
different perspectives, yet one striking thing is that they have the reality 
of man as their subject matter.  
 
Religion and its Role in the Society 

Religion plays an important role on culture of a society. Every 
religion is the product of a particular culture within which it grew13. It is 
hard to comprehend any religion without understanding the culture 
from which it developed. Every culture would certainly have impact in 
the methods of religion. Certain trends in history will help accelerate this 
view. For instance, Christian religion grew from the Jewish culture and 



236 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

one can understand why there is somewhat interrelatedness in both 
religion notwithstanding some differences though. This is because every 
society is unique in her cultural displays. 

 Religion is said to play very vital aspect in the human society 
where human person interacts in the different institutions whether 
domestic, economic and political institution. In fact, Shanjendu Nath 
gave some instances on how religion affect the social structure of the 
human person. They are in the realm of internal feelings, an external 
form of social control, and to help in the character formation of the 
human person.14 According to him, an important aspect of religion is 
prayer and different classes of people belonging to different castes of 
society assemble in religious institutions for performing prayer and 
worship15. This praying and fellowshipping together has a way of 
building the sentiments among themselves and this further influence 
what they do as a group in the building of the different social 
institutions. 

Religion also has a form of social control following the second 
aspect of Nath’s bifurcation of the roles of religion to society. This is 
because according to him, the different activities and their different 
spheres of social life are still influenced by religious rites and ceremonies; 
such that it becomes possible for people to express their religious feelings 
through rituals and ceremonies. This is evident in the different occasions 
of social life like marriages, birth, harvesting, hunting, death and so on. 
Here, you see the reality of ritual and other ceremonies performed in 
these occasions. This same rite can be extended to the economic aspect 
of the society and even in the aspect of the inauguration of a building 
structure and oath taking. All of these points to the fact that religion plays 
an important role in the further structuring of the society and its 
institutions. 

Nath went on to state that religion also help to shape the 
character of an individual16. According to him, religion brings a sense of 
social value in the mind of people. This will enable the human person to 
work in tandem with the norm of society that coheres with basic 
religious belief. He expresses this thus “in obeying the social laws or to 
respect the elders and to show sympathy towards the feelings of others, 
or to discharge the social obligations faithfully, the role of religion is 
immense”.17 This further proves the indispensable role of religion to the 
character formation of man wherein he is able to show civility in the 
ethical dictates of social life.  

This view can be liken Loyal Rue’s description of the function of 
religion. He sees the function of religion in the achievement of personal 
wholeness and social coherence18. For him, the mythical and the ancillary 
strategies of religions, shape the emotions and motivations of individuals 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    237 

in a way that allows them to overrule the innate intuitive morality of 
their biological heritage in favour of the culturally defined values 
encoded in myths. This is premised upon the notion that religious myths 
actually do promote a morality that induces behavior leading to personal 
wholeness and social cohesion. 

 Looking at the above roles of religion within the context of 
human interrelationship, one can see that the role of religion to human 
society is to lead to a healthy humanity. Be that as it may, there exist 
some maladies that threatens this strength of humanity. The next session 
of this work will deal with some challenges that posit threat to human 
interrelationship. 
 
Factors Militating Against Human Interrelatedness in the Society 
This aspect will bring to bear the different ills that are in the society and 
religious institution that further proved that man is yet to attain the full 
realization of socio-religious essence. A close look at society, one will 
notice certain mishap which can be translated as man’s inhumanity to man, 
the ‘survival of the fittest’ instinct and certain corrupt practices, that have 
tied down man’s destiny from the will of progress. It is in the 
identification of all of these deficiencies that we now ascertain the role of 
philosophy in enhancing a formidable structure for the formation of the 
human person. The assessment of these maladies will be taken from 
different perspectives. 
 
Sexist practices. There is no doubt that the society in which we live is 
characteristics of different agents, agencies and institution. However, 
outside this reality is the fact of gender awareness. According Sandra 
Bem, a psychologist “one cognitive process that seems nearly inevitable 
in humans is to divide people into groups. We can partition these groups 
on the basis of race, age, religion, and so on. However, most of the times 
we split humanity on the basis of gender. The first thing we instantly 
determine when meeting someone new, is their gender”19. This view 
shows the reality of gender consciousness, where people make a great 
divide of humanity on the basis of gender. With this in mind one is 
tempted to say this gender realization at people to be done is almost 
habitual and automatic as Issabela Crespi puts it “this process of 
categorizing others in terms of gender is both habitual and automatic. It’s 
nearly impossible to suppress the tendency to split the world in half, 
using gender as the great divider”20.  It is interesting to note that this 
great divide is not bad it in itself since nature has made it so. But the part 
that seem problematic is the reality of subjugation and denigration. 
Where a particular sex claims to be superior than the other; where a 
particular sex sees itself as the only qualified sex to attain a particular 



238 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

height. This has led to the contention between what I call feminism and 
masculinism. 

In a society where the reality of sexist practices abound, one can 
lay claim to the sad scenario of denigration. This is evident in burial rites, 
ownership of properties, domestic chores, political position, naming 
ceremonies and the likes. Ceremonies like these in some cultures are 
avenues for such sexist tendencies to be shown.  
 
Rape: This is another act of man’s inhumanity to man. It is a violent and 
forceful sexual act on another. Some to adult, while some others to 
minors. A. S Hornby defines rape as the crime of forcing somebody to 
have sex with one especially with violence”21. This means that rape 
involves the use of force. In other words, it is against the will of the 
person who is under compulsion to do so. In the same vein, Briganeti 
and Egbonimali see rape as an act of sexual violence that involves 
intercourse without consent or against someone being willing to engage 
in the act22. Samuel Okafor-Udah brought about another dimension of 
rape that occurs. According to him, this does not have to do with 
physical violence as such but a deception of a kind with the use of gift. 
He argues thus “an adult of any age range tactfully seduces a child of a 
tender age for either marriage or sex with an enticing gift and the child 
after collecting same willingly gives in for it with the adult, it is said to be 
rape as well23. He also went further to state that this form rape is viewed 
as “a sex crime carried out by pathological men or women who were 
unable to control their own sexual desires24. In a nut shell, rape is an 
unlawful sexual intercourse with someone with or without the use of 
force inorder to achieve sexual gratification. Different countries and 
societies have had a share of this anomaly. Samuel Okafor gave the 
Nigerian situation on rape when he noted: 

Rape is a global problem with women and children being mostly 
vulnerable. They are the ones bearing the brunt of this evil in every 
society of the world … there are several cases, which are very irritating. 
Now and then, it is reported that a teacher has raped a student. A 
religious leader his flock. Robbers have raped their victim. A man has 
raped a sister-in-law or daughter –in-law. A master has raped a 
housemaid. A security man has raped his master’s wife. A boss has raped 
his staff. A father has raped his daughter. A young man has raped his 
grandmother. A minor has raped a fellow minor. A traditional ruler has 
raped a subject. An 80 year old man has raped an 8 year old girl.25 
A close look at the above shows that the case of rape has crossed through 
different sections of a society, ranging from the political, religious, social, 
traditional sphere. Such exploitation have eaten deep into the fabric of 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    239 

the system. Thus the progression of the percentage over the cause of 
years has always been in the increase.  
 
Child Abuse: This another anomaly that has threatened societal 
cohesion. A child is one who has not attained the status of an adult. The 
child is often judged as one between the age brackets of 7 to 14. Any 
harm done to persons of this age bracket is termed child abuse; however, 
it is interesting to note that the society have been guilty of this over time. 
According to Slavka Michancova, research reveals that about twenty 
percent of women and five to ten percent of men worldwide were 
victims of child sexual abuse (CSA)26. Beauty, following the Scope of 
Child Abuse Problem U.S. 2005 Data, asserts that: 

Child abuse is a worldwide problem which is carried out 
by the strong on the weak, affecting children from birth 
to 18 years plus of age. The most recent US data on the 
scope of child abuse problem dates from 2005, during 
which 3.3 million reports of abuse and neglect were 
filled. About 60 percent of these reports warranted 
investigation with one-half of these allegations 
substantiated. It further stated, that these data indicate 
the incidence of child abuse and neglect to be 12.1 per 
1,000 children; 1,460 children (four percent per day) 
died in 2005 as a result of inflicting trauma with  more 
than 77 percent of these deaths in children less than 4 
years of age.27 

From the above, it shows that child abuse cuts across different states of 
the world giving the fact that it is a worldwide affair. This act is often 
done by the strong to inflict pain on the weak. It should also be noted 
that parents are also part of those who abuse their children. They do this 
on the ground that they have absolute control over the affairs of their 
children as such, their biddings must be obeyed. Care must be taken 
because this act is a crime that is punishable by law. Thus, Michancova 
states that child sexual abuse is a serious crime that represent massive 
violation of human rights and generates long-term negative impact in 
various aspects of victims’ lives.28 
 
Violence: Religious and social violence have become the order of the 
day - where conflicts between people of different religions and social 
sects reigns and where the different religions try to prove the supremacy 
of their religion via violence. For example, in some areas of Nigeria, 
Muslims cannot live peacefully with Christians. Commenting on the 
bane of ethno-religious crisis, George Asadu says: 



240 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

Though religion has played vital role in the society, and has contributed 
immensely to the national development of this country, it has also been 
wrongly used by some ethnic groups to afflict this country severally with 
conflicts leading to wanton destruction of properties and loss of human 
lives. Obviously, there has been too much blood letting in this country 
resulting from ethnic and religious conflict which is threatening the very 
foundation of Nigeria’s corporate existence as a nation. The menance of 
ethno-religious conflict in Nigeria is fast eroding the core socio-cultural 
and religious value which forbids murder, coverteousness … this has 
hampered the economic growth of this country to such a great extent 
that poverty has engulfed the majority of the citizen. Worst still, the 
mayhems have produced many disabled persons, orphans and widows 
and (widowers) …29 

The same is true of the political sphere of the state, where 
political actors do not really understand what political rivalry is all about. 
People see the differences in party alliances as differences of humanity 
and as a result all forms of violence are being perpetrated to pull the 
other person down. The same is true of the educational and social 
sectors. This is evident where members of a particular schools resort to 
violence to prove the supremacy of their school. Where some School 
Proprietors resort to blackmail and give negative and unfounded reasons 
why students should not be enrolled in another school due to unhealthy 
competition.  

 
Racial Discrimination/Tribalism: Racism and ethnic bigotry are 
another forms of malady that has affected the society. This is almost 
synonymous with religious and social violence. This is where people gets 
what and how due to cultural affiliation. Where a black man feels 
comfortable with his fellow blacks and does not want to associate with 
the white. On the other hand, when a white man sees himself as superior 
to the blacks. This is also evident in a multicultural state like Nigeria for 
instance. In a situation when there is social hegemony and nepotism 
about who get a particular position. Where a Yoruba man feels 
comfortable with Yoruba people alone, or Hausa people do same with 
their fellow Hausa. Or the Igbo the same with theirs. This racist cum 
ethnic biases further strengthens the wrong use of son of the soil 
syndrome. Such a myopic view about life has a way of playing negatively 
in the normative vision of the human person 
 
Other maladies include Deception and exploitation by some 
religious ministers on their subjects. This is evident when so called 
ministers of God blackmail the conscience of their faithful in order to get 
something material from them. Where the sacrilegious acts have become 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    241 

the order of the day. The sin of simony have so rocked some religious 
institutions that you now begin to ask the way forward about authentic 
worship. Is it the case of the parading of a white man in Kenya whom 
they claim is Jesus? Or the one who asks his believers to eat grass and 
serpent? Or the religious leaders who ask his followers to kill in the 
name religion? All of these threaten societal cohesion.  

Even the different Corruption practices in the different states 
are not left out. This ranges from stealing, robbery, kidnapping, electoral 
fraud; academic fraud and other social menaces. All of these menaces 
serves as clogs in the will of progress in any given state. 
 
Philosophical Principles and Religio-Cultural Relationship: 
Towards a Normative Vision of the Human Person 
Here, the irreplaceable tool of philosophy will be harnessed. Philosophy 
as a normative discipline is from two Greek words, philos and Sophia, 
meaning love of wisdom. A close look at the nature of philosophy will 
show that man is placed at the center of it all. This is as a result of man’s 
quest to know more about reality. Williams Aso captures this clearly 
when he says “man as the subject of philosophy has unquenchable thirst 
for knowledge not only for empirical realities alone but also phenomenal 
realities and everything that concern human experience and the universe 
in general”.30 It is in this quest for the normative vision of the human 
person that the ethical principles of philosophy will be harnessed. 

The ethical principles will help in carving out a normative vision 
of the human person; this is because ethics which is a core branch of 
philosophy is one that permeates virtually all aspect of life. It is a 
descriptive, prescriptive and normative discipline. Its normative vision 
will see to the formulation of the moral order of actions that are not 
adjudged by personal feelings or emotions, but within the overall ground 
of moral values and norms. Morality is not ruled by what a person feels 
alone or think alone. There must be an objective way of looking at 
morality that will help get rid of socio-religious maladies. In doing this, 
there must be a consideration for others. This is where the moral 
justification of ‘otherness’ comes in. In Paul Ricoeur’s work titled Oneself 
as Another, ‘otherness’ is tied to the self and this self has a responsibility of 
preserving ‘others’31. Martin Buber’s intersubjectivity philosophy of 
dialogue, came up with the I and Thou interaction that presents the 
human person that is always in constant interaction with themselves 
giving the fact that all are of one substance. Edmund Hurssel gave a 
phenomenological approach to this normative vision when he came up 
with the theory of experiencing ‘others’ as myself32. Here, the 
consideration of the well being of others must first be considered. 



242 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

Anyone who thinks of this will not rape, or cajole people in the name of 
religion.  

Even the case of unhealthy sexist practices is not left out in the 
struggle to build a normative vision of the human person. Thus, in 
Simeone de Beauvoir’s work The Second Sex, it clearly stated that she was 
out rightly against patriarchy supremacy and labeling of women. In this 
work, Simeone argues that women is the other. It is from this notion, 
othering as a philosophical term takes on the notion of prejudice, 
inequality, marginality33. This is so because while othering is used to 
describe those who belong to a subordinate social category, otherness on 
the other hand, refers to the characteristics of the other that is not to be 
stereotype as inferior. 

As for the case of racial discrimination and ethnic bigotry, our 
knowledge of substance and accidents in metaphysics (a branch of 
philosophy) shows that every human person shares one substance – the 
humanity of the human person. The humanness of the white man or the 
black man or as evident in the different ethnic groups in Nigeria, the 
Hausa, Igbo, Yoruba, Efik or Ijaw is not lesser or higher than the 
humanness of the Fulani, Tiv, Idoma, Esan or Egede as the case may be. 
We all share one humanity. The fact that one is a white man or a black 
man or Igbo, Yoruba or Hausa is simply accidental to the being of the 
individual person.34 

Emmanuel Levinas theory of alterity and otherness is not out of 
place. The French philosopher highlighted the need to think of the other. 
His alteririty expresses yet again a normative vision of the human person. 
This means considering the wellbeing of others. It is in doing this 
Francis Ikhianosime says that Levinas in his alterity is “trying to 
safeguard the other from violation, oppression and inferiorization, hence, 
his use of Alterity begins with a sense of responsibility to the other”.35 
Levinas preoccupation here is in the case of having a responsibility 
towards the well being of others and not for the other to be 
discriminated upon all subjected to all forms of denigration. 

A furtherance to this normative formation of the human person 
can be assessed from Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative. “Act only 
according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it 
should become a universal law”36. This formulation seeks an objective 
method of doing things in the society and in religious palace. The second 
formulation of his categorical imperative “Act so that you treat humanity, 
whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and 
never as a means only”37 Since we live in a society, the wellbeing of 
others must be considered. None should let his non-challant attitude or 
negligence to cause harm to another as Richard Wollheim says argues 
“every action that occurs within a society and rises at all above the level 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    243 

of triviality is bound to impinge upon other members of that society”38 
this simply means that any act of neglect done by one is capable of 
causing damage to everyone. Wollheim went further to state that “ the 
only actions that are unconditionally exempt from the jurisdiction of the 
state are of the order of brushing one’s teeth”39 however, I beg to disagree 
here that not brushing a teeth affect the individual alone, it also affect 
those he communicate with; that is, those of low immune system.  

John. S. Mill’s philosophical influence is evident in his defense 
of utilitarianism and liberalism. Mill’s utilitarianism assesses actions and 
institutions in terms of their effects on human happiness and enjoins us 
to perform actions and design institutions so that they promote in one 
formulation, maximize human happiness40 this further shows that Mill’s 
utilitarianism is a progressive theory for human development. Although, 
Mill’s Utilitarianism has its own shortcoming, yet his principle on 
liberty, individuality and solidarity has much to say on the dignity of 
others. 

It should be noted that human freedom is not meant to be an 
impediment to authentic relationship between persons rather it should 
be a bridge to aid human advancement and foster morality. It is painful 
to note that people use freedom in the wrong way. For some the freedom 
of the will is an avenue for them to be violent and as a result see their 
views as the most superiror. The normative vision of the human person 
here calls for a proper harnessing the rational ethics of freedom. This 
means the kind of freedom that is guided by rationality. It therefore 
means that the human person must continually live in a manner that 
justifies rationality. This is because, if man does not take advantage of his 
rationality, he may be steeped on a path of self-annihilation”41 
Philosophers down the ages have been passionate about doing a defence 
for an authentic relationship of the human person. They do this because 
of the belief that the human person is a relational being. 

Even the African traditional society recognizes this interaction of 
the human person. This is because Africans conceive of the human 
person from the descriptive point of view and the normative point of 
view. While the descriptive point of view refers to the biological frame 
work of the human person; but the normative aspect of the human 
person draws strength from the sense of the community. In order words, 
Africans holds that for one to truly realize himself, he must be a part of 
the community. African ontology is communalistic; it is part of the 
unique identity of Africans thus Frank Ndubuisi says “in African 
metaphysics, the self is conceived essentially towards others; that is, a 
‘being-with-others’. The African is not just a human being but essentially 
a ‘being-with’. Consequently it is the community who makes the 
individuals, because of his relationship with others in the community’42. 



244 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

Jack Aigbodioh on his part holds that, .African traditional (i.e. 
indigenous) cultures are noted by anthropological and sociological 
scholars alike for their communalistic form of life, which emphasizes the 
humanistic values of the co-dependency ethos with its universalistic 
appeal to equality and intersubjective recognition43. In fact, in African 
ontology, the human person fully realizes itself in the community. When 
Mbiti says that, the African says to himself, "I am because we are, the 
“we” referred to here is not an additive 'we' but a thoroughly fused 
collective 'we'44. To further buttress this, Aigbodioh concludes that 
communalism, or its cognate communitarianism (from community), is a 
term used to express the peculiar cohesive and integrative character of 
African traditional society45. 

It becomes pertinent to state that man relates as long as he exists 
and keeping with the norms of authentic relationship will help make the 
society a better place 

 
Conclusion 
In this work, we have succeeded in making an exposition of the notion of 
man and how he cannot be separated from the activities of the society. 
This is translatable from the perspective of the domestic interaction that 
exist in the family, the school and other social institutions. All of these 
sociological strata depicts the reality of interaction. 
The work also made an assessment of religion from its etymology to the 
different theories that are associated with it. In fact the sociological 
theory as exposed by Emile Durkheim, the Anthropological as espoused 
by Ludwig Feuerbach and the psychological as espoused by Freud shows 
that the religion has man as its subject matter and this man in in constant 
relationship whether with his fellow men or with the supreme. 

The work also argues that although man is seen as a being that is 
in constant relationship, yet this relationship has not be fully realized 
judging from the fact that different ills are perpetrated daily in our world. 
Ills like rape, sexist practices, ethnicism, violence, nepotism and the likes. 

Be that as it may the paper concludes that only the principles of 
philosophy can provide a normative tools from the enhancement of the 
relationship and interrelatedness of the human person. To achieve this, 
there must be a proper adoption of some ethical moral principles that 
helps to foster cohesion in all strata of humanity. This principle is the 
need to consider one’s good and the good of the ‘others’. This means 
seeing others as having the same essence with set goals. 
 
 
 
 



Section II: Philosophical Perspectives And Human Formation    245 

Endnotes  
                                                      
1 Ayo Fatubarin & Olusegun Alokan, “Religion, Man and his Environment” British 

Journal of Education Vol. 1, No.2 2013 pp48-61 
2 Hayatullah Laluddin “A Review of three Major Sociological Theories and an Islamic 

Perspective”. International Journal of Islamic Thought Vol. 10: 2016 8-26 
3 Bryjak & Soroka in Hayatullah Laluddin “A Review of three Major Sociological 

Theories and an Islamic Perspective”  1992 ibid p. 24 
4 Alexander Spirkin Dialectical Materialis. Moscow. Progress Pub. 1983 p.88 
5 F.M Anayet Hossain & M. D. Korban Ali “Relation between Individual and Society” 

Open Journal of Social Sciences. Vol. 2 N. 8 2014 
6 Bernard Haring, The Laws of Christ, (New York: Newman Press, Vol III, 1964 p.119 
7 Joseph Omoregbe: A Philosophical our look of religion Lagos: Joja Educational 

Research and Publishers Limited, 2000 p.3 
8 Geroge Galloway: The Philosophy of Religion, New York Charles Scribner’s Sons 

1914 p.184 
9 http://www.ezsoftech.com/Akram/manandreligion.asp lassed assesed 21st 

January, 2020 
10 Ludwig, FeuerbachThe Essence of Christianity, Trans. By George Eliot, New York: 

Harper Touchbooks, 1956 pp 29-30 
11 Henning, Charles. "On the Origin of Religion" in American Anthropologist, 11(12), 

1898. 374 
12 Joseph Omoregbe. A Philosophical look at Religion Opcit p.10 
13 Ibid p.300 
14 Shanjendu Nath. Religion and its Role in Society”. IOSR Journal of Humanities 

and Social Sciences Vol. 20 2015 pp 82-85 
15 Ibid 83 
16 ibid 
17 ibid 
18 Michael Stausberg, Contemporary Theories of Religion: A Critical Companion. 

London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group London and New York 2009 p.233 
19 Sandra Bem. The Lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. 

New Haven: Yale Univerity Press 1993 p.9 
20 Issabella Crespi “ Socialization and Gender Roles Within the Family: A Study on 

Adolescents and their Parents in Great Britain” http://www.mariecurie.org 

/annals/volume3/crespi.pdf 
21 Hornby, A. S. 2006 Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current Emglish, 7th 

Edition, New York: Oxford University Press p.2 
22 Brigneti, P & Egbonimali, S. 2002 “Rape in Nigeria: Theory & Reality Retrived from: 

http://www.Quardian.co.uk/world/2002/auQ/20/Qanda.islam on July 4, 2013. P.4 
23 Samuel Okafor-Udah “ Ethical Problems of Rape as a social Cnkerworm in our 

present Day Society” Retrived from https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jrhr/article/ 

viewFile/119696/109156 p. 161 
24 ibid 
25 Ibid 162 



246 Formation of the Human Person in the 21st Century 

                                                                                                                         
26 Slavka Michancova “ Ethical Dilemmas in Dealing with Cases of Child Sexual 

Abuse” in Sorbye, L. W. (ed) Ethical Challenges in Professional Praxis: experiences 

from Slovakia Pressov: 2011 pp 119-137 
27 Beauty O. Biokoro. “The Bane of Child Abuse and the Rights of the Nigeria Child to 

Education” Journal of Resourcefulness and Distinction, Volume 8 No. 1, August, 2014  p. 

2 
28 Slavka Michancova “ Ethical Dilemmas in Dealing with Cases of Child Sexual 

Abuse” in Sorbye, L. W. (ed) Ethical Challenges in Professional Praxis: Opcit  p.135 
29 George Asadu. “Ethno-Religious Conflict: The Bane of Nigeria Unity” Hofa: 

African Journal of Multidisciplinary Research HAJMR. Vol. 3, No.1, 2018, p. 38-51 

(38) 
30 William Aso. Rudiments of Philosophy for Undergraduate; Lagos. Fropiel 

International Ltd 2018 p. 3 
31 Paul Ricoeur, Oneself as Another, trans. K. Blamey (Chicago & London: The 

University of Chicago Press, 1992 p.26 
32 Moran Dermot, Introduction to Phenomenology, London: Routledge Taylor and 

Francis Group, 2000. pp 337-338 
33 Jimoh Anselm “Justice and the othered Minority Lessons from Africa 

Communalism” in Elvis Imafidon (ed), Handbook of African Philosophy of 

Difference: Switzerland: Springer, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04941-

6_12-1 
34 J. O. Ndubuisi ‘The Role of Philosophy in Contemporary Society: The Nigerian 

Experience’ 

Humanity & Social Sciences Journal 10 (1): 40-46, 2015 
35 Francis Ikhianosime, “Levinas’ Theory of Alterity and the Sketching of an 

Epistemology of Otherness”. Ekpoma Review Vol 5 N. 1 2019 p.128 
36 Immanuel Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, translated by Lewis 

White Beck, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill, Library of Liberal Arts, 1959 p.39 
37 Ibid  
38 Richard Wollheim “John Stuart Mill and the Limits of State Action” Social 

Research Vol. 40 p. 1-30 
39 ibid 
40 David Brink. “Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy” https://plato.stanford.edu 

/entries/mill-moral-political/.lassed assessed 1/03/2020 
41 Francis Ikhianosime: “Fundamentals on Ethics and their Consequential 

Imperative” Unpub 2019 p.14 
42 Frank Ndubuisi “The Philosophical paradigm of African Identity and 

Development,” Open Journal of Philosophy  Vol.3, No. 1A, 2013 p.224 
43 Jack Aigbodioh. “Stigmatization in African Communalistic Societies”. Cultura: 

International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology. VIII . 1 (2011): p. 27. 
44 Menkiti, J.‘‘Person and Community in African Traditional Thought,’’ in R. Wright (ed.), 

African Philosophy: An Introduction (Lanham, MD: University Press of America). 1984 p. 1 
45 Jack Aigbodioh “Stigmatization Paradigm of African Identity and Development” 

Opcit p.28 

 


