As individuals, we are born and raised by cultures and adjoining philosophies, or what we can interpret as influences on how we think and engage in relationships. Time and time again, we are challenged by the confusing state of whether we must pretend or remain honest with an engagement, with even a relative, friend or more so, a stranger. We can’t consolidate the ‘logic of trust’. Thus, regardless of assumed cultural sameness, an innate presumption will propel a digression towards extreme caution. Here is where the lessons of logic interrupt: “Once bitten, twice shy.” We may not have experienced this ourselves, but it is difficult not to have read or have been read through news castes of sever deceptions. Logic seems to be the invisible guardian on our right shoulder, influencing caution where culture and philosophy may make us vulnerable. Then, it would be safe to presume that “culture and philosophy” must be wrestled by the principles of logic until proven true at individual levels.

One of the ideas we must explore in our quiet moments of struggling to understand the world we live in is that the major Aphrodisiac whose influence is ingrained with the marriage of culture and its agreed philosophy is religion. Religion, indeed, has proven its usefulness and is not without blame. But religion has also warned us about its “Generation of Vipers” imploring as a guide to be guarded by the ability of reasoning and not the feelings to be group comforted. Religion can also be transferred into a man-made ‘Proposing Utopia’ with new gods that may take you too long and too late to see through. In his simple ‘Fables’, the ancient Ethiopian philosopher Aesop warned us of the ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’ and, in its conclusion, that deception is all-consuming. However, it is better to be safe, not sorry and damaged beyond lengthy repair.

We live in several worlds that challenge our resolve. But a world where ‘God or/and Nature’ has not left us without the faculties to unwind from labyrinths of consuming dogmas. If we pay attention and explore, then we will find that we have not been left completely void of the seeker’s journey to clarity.

Culture has taught us the symbolic language of rites and rituals and the creative expressions to define its language. Likewise, philosophy has argued towards its truths at all levels, creating values on matters that can become absorbed into a mindset and even a belief system- a parallel religion- based on added propositions, whether based on truth or influenced by manipulating myths. The embrace of ‘Logic’ is rooted in observation and ‘time travel’. The latter is a task of the exploration of the origins of peoples that determined why some are greedy, deceitful and conceive myths to justify such tendencies. The other in the conquest of the invader will not exterminate but allow his settlement and survival. For example, Ramses III treated the defeated sea peoples by enslaving them, incorporating them, their women and children into Khemetic citizenry, and their warriors into the army of Khemet rather than executing them all. Their attack was so filled with the certainty of victory that they bought their women and children. Though most of these invaders were not Africans as the population of Khemetic were, they were allowed to live and gain continuity of life. This is the context of the openness of the civilisation of Ancient Khemet, but this was based on the fact that they had mastered irrigation, food silos and contained no apartheid philosophy in their dogmas. Nor were the people of Khemet a nomad humanity seeking sustenance through conquest. They could afford to be generous to enemies. This paragraph is a ‘logical’ assessment based on exploring the logic behind cultural and philosophical belief systems; unlike the desperation of the sea peoples, who seemed to have had no desire to return to their former lands and thus had thrown all in towards their defeat of Khemet. What were the Sea peoples’ beliefs, how did they live, who were their Gods, and what culture nurtured their evident temerity?

Such is the path of our exploration to better understand what is hidden behind the temerity of offensive concepts wrapped up in cultures and their supporting philosophies. Most likely, we will better understand through ‘logical evidence’ what to expect in the world we dwell in, rather than assuming that everyone shares what we may find accommodating.