An Anthropological Analysis -By Nkom

The coming of man into existence is undemocratic. For man found his way into existence with no idea of how he was created and formed by He who forms and is not formed, He who moves but is not moved, He who causes but is not caused, and He whose existence is necessary and independent of anything nor anybody. However, man remains the unsatisfied, self egoistic, and the self centered creature created by the Creator who is pure of all these which man possesses. The aforementioned ills and selfish interest of man would make any rational being to pause for a while and ponder on the question; “where did they originate or emanate from?”

The above question has been a metaphysical problem which cannot be answered carelessly without undergoing some anthropological verification.

In trying to profer solutions to this question, different scholars with well articulated ideas and philosophers whose methods of analysis cannot be compromised, have put their scholastic pens into writing in order to give their individual submission on this issue. Among these men is St. Augustine a medieval thinker who postulated that the source of evil is not the Creator but the Creature, by extension, the human person is the source of all those evils initially mentioned. And I ask again who is the source of the human person? Because the mango tree cannot in any way produce a cashew fruit. Or rather, a woman and a man who come together to give birth to a child cannot in any way produce a Child with a contrary gene of theirs (if the child is dark in complexion it means he got the element of that complexion from either of his parents).

We cannot absolutely say that the source of the human nature is the origin of evil, because all things were created to be good without any aorta of evil in them, and I still remain in my cave of ignorance and confusion on how this thing which has inflicted so much pains to our society came from. Should it be the free will granted to us by the Source of our existence? (but are we free even when our actions are been attached to so much responsibilities in that one enjoys at the end ‘that is if there is after life’ when he exhibited good characters while existing and also receives the contrary when he does evil? Are we really free even when we don’t choose when to begin our very existence and when to quit existing? (can someone who is free be controlled by a contingent being?), Are we really free when we are enslaved by rules on how we should live our lives? ( even when freedom means to be emancipated or liberated from enslavement, or are we missing the ideal word to use instead of freewill?). Or rather is someone who free still been attached to someone who checkmates his ways of doing things?

More so, even if our freewill could be said to be responsible for our evil, where did this freewill originate from?

Our very existence is still questionable because some things seem very enigmatic with regard our being and existence.

08162878128