Drug Decriminalization in Maryland Through an African Centered Research Paradigm- Analysis and Recommendations

2. African ancients—especially those of the Nile Valley—are thought to have possessed
supreme wisdom because their objective was to generate knowledge that would enable
people to tap into the complete, positive potentiality given to them by the Creator (Akbar,
1994; Asante, 1990; Diop, 1991; Karenga, 1989; Van Sertima, 1989). By cultivating the
beliefs that humans have great potential to tap into the spirit and essence of the Creator
and that science should not be separated from this pursuit, the African ancients are thought
to have possessed the moral ingredients for creating a society wherein human interactions
and ideals are undergirded by mutual respect, a concern for collective well-being,
spirituality, and a striving toward excellence.
3. Each idea or theory uniquely adds to a different understanding of the totality of the
human experience. Afrocentric social work research asserts that no one theory is, or can
be, robust enough to explain all or most dimensions of social and human phenomena.
Rather, theories are conceived as uniquely different ways in which social and human
phenomena can be described and explained. They are unique in that they reflect
interpretations held by one individual or a cadre of like-minded individuals.
Each theory serves to contribute a unique piece of understanding that can be used to
construct a complete picture of social life that limits or prevents knowledge hegemony.
(Schiele, 2000).
Scheile’s analysis is essential, as it addresses an assumption that often props up around African
centered research paradigms. They do not seek to replace the hegemony of eurocentric models of
research with their own orthodoxy and perspectives, instead, the African research paradigm seeks
to balance knowledge by incorporating often overlooked aspects. This reflects another distinction
often noted between eurocentric and African centered thought systems. The eurocentric scientific
method assumes a dichotomous and competitive vision of knowledge creation, where ideas are
locked in mortal combat and through objective experimentation and analysis. The better idea wins,
and the inferior ideas are relegated to the dustbin of history. This might make some sense to
scientific inquiry in fields like astronomy, where for some questions (such as the debate between
the heliocentric or geocentric vision of the planetary system) there can only be one correct answer.
As Ani notes, applying this methodology from material sciences to the social sciences obscures
the complexity and humanity and the nature of racism that impacts our view of social sciences.
Moreover, it ignores the political implications of even so-called objective, “hard” science, such as
the heliocentric universe being attributed by many solely to the Greeks even though there is
substantial cultural intermixing between Egypt and Ancient Greece, as well as often overlooked
evidence that the heliocentric theory traces it roots to Ancient Egypt (Van Sertima, 1999). In
contrast to this, African systems of thought are often seen as diunital, seeking to unite disparate
4151 Park Heights Avenue, Suite 207, Baltimore, MD 21215 • www.lbsbaltimore.com • (410) 374-7683