Abstract
Why qualify the way of seeing? Are we doing justice to seeing when it is qualified? Doesn't the qualification of the way of seeing undermine the universal way of seeing and thus deprive it of its essential nature? Evidently, the qualification of seeing suggests that there are multiples ways of seeing, and an African way of seeing is but one among other possible ways. This suggestion should be taken for what it is—namely, a suggestion. As such, it could be erroneous if it turns out that seeing is seeing without qualification. So, how is it with seeing? More specifically, what is African about seeing?