It defines everything in society.From what we find beautiful,our politics,our business,religion(and its interpretation),education,environment,entertainment.........Culture!

Absolutely.

Tycho should define these terms

'western brand of thinking',
'challenges of the present world'
'challenges'
'present world'
'traditional African systems'
'traditional'
'systems'
'ingredients'
'peaceful and prosperous world'
'universal brotherhood and freedom'

Do they have a definition as used in his assertions?

Some clarity so that readers get on the same page, with same meanings.

Light, enlightenment, illumination is needed here, lol.

The challenges are the concerns raised by humanity at this point in time like environmental degradation, war, the need for even distribution of wealth, exercise of basic freedoms, and changes in human spirituality.

You have shed light?

'western brand of thinking'
Northern vs Southern Europeans.
This distinction has been attributed to religion; Northerners more 'industrious' than the southerners.

No northern country has so far needed bailout unlike several southern countries; the evidence cited. (There is no way to disprove this account.)

Therefore which? northern vs southern worldview, symbols and interactions and relationships.

'African traditional systems'
There are how many individual distinct African traditional systems?
Each with aspects, philosophy, mysticism on its origins and consequent societal systems built upon that myth that also affected its relations +vely or -vely with the next system. So which one are you referring to.

'Present world'
North Horr despite being on the same 'present world' as Manhattan, are also in 'different worlds'. So what is this 'present world' you speak of?

'challenges'
the challenges in mutindwa that threaten and concern the individuals there are not the challenges in Hollywood.

'ingredients'
philosophies are as varied as the thoughts they represent. so which one?

So you see, please give an explicit definition of what you have in mind.

You need to use similar definitions in all areas so as to talk about oranges with oranges.

While it may be true that there was variety in cultural expression within the African continent, it shouldn't be assumed that there were no bodies politic that were in interaction. Such interactions constited of a shared value system that can be enunciated. The same with the 'West'.

Yes Colonialism eclipsed African traditions. But do these enlightenment forces meet our needs as Africans and human global needs?

The Missionaries came with certain ideas about God, are these ideas still valid?

Let's take the Church as an example. How does our understanding of God change as gays and homosexuals are embraced? Or as information technology decentralizes authority and increases human capacities?

It would certainly be irresponsible for us not to consider these issues.

Like now, the world is moving towards communalism, and who are best placed to effect this?

Northerners and Southerners certainly share values even despite their differences. Same for Africans. It's these shared values that we are talking about.

If you go to Mutindwa you'll find someone on the internet, events there concern everyone across the globe.

The act of 'regulating', or changing a peoples consciousness is inevitable as cultures interact, and knowledge increased. This process is still on, and we are now talking about our approach to this kind of interaction and its basis.

Shared values are not independent of differences.

Shared values do not, cannot override differences.

Talking of shared values as if they are universal and cannot be influenced by the differences is simplistic. The different worldviews even affect how these 'shared values' are viewed if they are even really 'shared'.

If you are talking about the shared values in this thread to the exclusion of differences, then you are being very simplistic, basic, elementary.

This debate is therefore simplistic, basic, elementary and not realistic.

In wazua parlance, this thread would be ABK!!!!