Herstoricity as Intellectual Gender Politics: An African Philosophical Perspective

Main Article Content

Dr. Gregory Emeka Chinweuba
Dr. Uchenna Azubuike Ezeogu

Abstract

Herstoricity is now a conscious trend in African Philosophical circle. This study argues that this trend is non-value-neutral; for it projects rational contents that are largely feminine, hence the trend is contextually considered an intellectual gender politics. It is the expression and projection of female intellectual identities, intuitions, reasoning, attitudes, abilities, experiences, modes, voices, thoughts, solutions and rational perspectives that mark and make feminine difference. Thus, herstoricity is an intellectual agency projecting feminine intellectual equivalence, equality and rationality in African philosophical knowledge. This intellectual identity politics is even more glaring as herstorical perspectives reflect to be more rational option questing for intellectual recognition, stimulation and emancipation of female gender scholarships. With philosophical method of analysis, this study explores the nature of philosophical herstorical perspective as intellectual gender politics in African philosophy. The study interrogates herstorical gender politics as an academic differentiation and implications of female perspectives in the development of African philosophy. The study notes that herstorical perspectives are being consciously developed to ensure harmonious inclusion, balance and solidification of feminine perspectives in African philosophical circle.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section

Articles

Author Biographies

Dr. Gregory Emeka Chinweuba, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Agbani, Enugu

General Studies Division (Philosophy Unit).

Dr. Uchenna Azubuike Ezeogu, Nigerian Maritime University

General Studies (Philosophy Unit)

Associate Professor.

How to Cite

      Herstoricity as Intellectual Gender Politics: An African Philosophical Perspective. (2026). Integral Research, 3(9), 112-129. https://doi.org/10.57067/