IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5.

ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

CULTIVATING THE CULTURE OF LIFE: CHALLENGES IN THE 21ST

CENTURY GLOBALIZED WORLD
Columbus Nnamdi Ogbujah, Ph.D
Department of Philosophy
Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
[email protected]
DOI: 10.13140/ RG.2.2.23433.67684

Abstract
In the category of existents, life is the highest property; and within the gambit of
the highest property of existents, human life is the supreme good. Although most
cultures and positive laws affirm this in principle, the reality is that human life
has never been so threatened and demeaned as now. This essay highlighted how,
by devising multiple ways of extinguishing life, the 21st century revels in the
culture of death left over by the previous era. It identified the ruins of two World
Wars; the spate of genocide, murder and fratricidal strife; the instantiation of
policies supporting abortion, infanticide and euthanasia; the exploitation of
nature resulting in natural disasters; and the greed of individualism, as blips
which have all too often been aided by globalization to universally advance the
“culture of death” as the new norm. The essay concluded by making a strong case
for the defence of human life, rejection of a culture of death, and the cultivation of
the “culture of life.”
Keywords: culture of life, left-liberalism, glocalization, humane
relationship, diffusion.

Introduction
To be is to exist, and to exist, among others, is to have life. Plants, animals,
fungi, bacteria, etc., exist, in the sense of their capacity for biological
processes; they can instantiate properties. Using the Aristotelian
distinction between accident and essence, we can identify two contrasting
categories of properties: contingent and necessary properties. A thing‘s
property is contingent when it could do without such a property, that is, it
might as well not have had it (accident). When I mop my room instead of
tending to my garden, the act of mopping is my contingent property. It
doesn‘t modify my being if I do not mop. I mop perhaps, due to the
premium I place on it within the hierarchy of properties. On the other
hand, being human is my necessary property, in the sense that it is
impossible for me to be a nonhuman (essence). If it were so, then I would
be necessarily excluded from the class of humans. As a rule, all essential
properties are attached to their bearers, in the sense that they necessarily

48
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

define what the things are in themselves.1 Life is the highest property of
existents; the ultimate good in the scheme of reality.

Within the gambit of the highest property of existents, human life is

supreme. It trumps others not just because of its capacity for self-
consciousness and volition, but because, in some way, it ―transcends‖
space and time. Mortality is an essential property of life: every living
thing, including humans, goes through the process of generation and
decay. So, when we say human life is in serious danger, it is not for the
normal process of disintegration resulting from the essential property of
mortality, but from the loss of humane values; from the growing ―culture
of death.‖ Over the centuries, the threats to human lives have
exponentially grown. Even though there may have been more wars until
the modern era, our own age seems to revel in wanton destruction of life:
there are a thousand and one ways by which a person can die today more
than ever.

The ―culture of death‖ pervades our society. The 20th century bequeathed
us the tragedies and ruins of two World Wars, with attendant anti-
Semitism; the Rwandan genocide and many fratricidal strife; the
instantiation of policies supporting abortion, infanticide and euthanasia;
the exploitation of nature; and the profligacy of political elites, have all too
often advanced the ―culture of death‖ as the new norm. Having not
learned from the ills of past atrocities, the present generation sadly, seems
to compete in breaking new negative grounds. In the end, the
consequences are extreme poverty, diseases, and death. These
multifarious challenges undoubtedly jeopardize the survival of humanity
in this twenty-first century. Now, more than ever, there is an urgent need
to defend human life, to discard the ―culture of death‖, and promote the
―culture of life.‖ The task is daunting; the challenges are many, but not
insurmountable. In the following paragraphs, we shall look at these
challenges and suggest ways out of the quagmire.

The Enigma of Human Life

Life is a beautiful gift bequeathed to organisms that are structured into
kingdoms as animals, plants, fungi, protists, archaea, and bacteria. This
primary delineation based on the capacity for performing organic
processes of signaling and self-sustaining courses, is in contradistinction

1Nelson, M. 2020. ―Existence‖, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020

Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
https://plato.standord.edu/archives/sum/2020/entries/existence/

49
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

to others without such ability, either for their basic lack (inanimate
beings), or for having been deprived of them through death. For the
most part, an organism possesses life when it is composed of cells, can
grow, reproduce, adapt to situations, respond to stimuli, sustain
homeostasis and metabolism, and have the capacity to die. Nonetheless,
recent developments show that non-cellular organisms in the likes of
viruses, are now included into life forms within some quarters. Presently,
scientists are unable to agree on the number of life forms on earth because
some species live in places that cannot be accessed, or are very tiny to be
seen, or are parasites that inhabit other organisms. In consequence,
experts using variant modules have bandied different, often outrageous
numbers.

As a species within the broad animal kingdom, humans possess a biomass

of nearly 9 times (0.06 Gigatons of Carbon [Gt C]) higher than that of all
wild mammals (0.007 Gt C) in the biosphere. 2 Even though humans
constitute an insignificant fraction of animal biomass, they dominate
others with activities such as whaling and exploitation of other marine
mammals, logging that has resulted to deforestation, release of incredible
amount of carbon that are sequestered by plants, and the consumption of
wild land mammal species. All these significantly reduce the biomass of
other life forms within the biosphere. This is not surprising, especially to
those impelled by the biblical injunction to ―be fruitful, multiply, fill the
earth and subdue it.‖ 3 But to others, the current decline of the earth‘s
biomass relative to its value before human civilization is a serious source
of concern for sustainable development.

Depending on one‘s primordial convictions and intellectual bent, the

origin of life forms has been ascribed either to abiogenesis or to the
creative works of divine powers. Abiogenesis―the natural process by
which life arose from non-living matter, such as simple organic
compounds 4 is hinged on the hypothesis that life emerged on Earth
through physicochemical processes that can be invented, understood, and
replicated. The assumption is that billions of years ago, the earliest living
cells emerged, and through the process of complex evolution, these cells

2 Yonon, M. Bar-On, Rob Phillips, and Ron Milo. 2018. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, PNAS June 19, 2018, 115 (25),
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711842115
3 Genesis 1: 28.
4 Oparin, A.I. 1953. The Origin of Life. Trans. with new introduction by Sergius Morgulis

(2nd ed.). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, p. vi; Originally published 1938, New
York: The Macmillan Company.

50
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

gave rise to the current diversity of life forms. Charles Darwin

popularized this theory with his 1859 publication of On the Origin of
Species. 5 With him, every species of organisms arises and develops
through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase
the individual‘s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Complex
creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally overtime, as
random genetic mutations occur within an organism‘s genetic code. The
mutations which aid survival are preserved and transmitted to future
generations. With the passage of time, these beneficial mutations
accumulate and ossify into entirely different organisms. 6 The present
differentiations in life forms are due to the structure and shape which
accumulated genetic mutations acquire. In a sense, abiogenesis precludes
the ideas of miraculous creation or spontaneous generations, and suggests
that all living organisms are related to each other and have a common
ancestry.

In contrast to this, creationism―the religious idea that all aspects of nature

such as earth, all life forms including humans, animals, plants and indeed
the entire universe emerged through the creative work of God, beckons
for recognition. Different cultures and civilizations have developed a
pantheon of creation myths along the centuries. Besides Hesiod‘s
Theogony―the Greek‘s oldest and most influential creation account, 7 there
were many other accounts of primal events that circulated in ancient
Greece and surrounding vicinities. In fact, the vision of three-tier
cosmos―Heaven, Earth, and Underworld in Hesiod‘s Theogony was partly
a derivation from the ancient Near Eastern traditions. Although there are
some identified resemblances between the Genesis account of Judeo-
Christian religion and those of Mesopotamian and Babylonian myths, the
experience of God‘s incarnation in Judeo-Christian tradition accentuated
and popularized its widespread.

The Christian Bible contains a step by step account of the world‘s creation.
Divided into two separate versions (Gen. 1:1-2:4; and Gen. 2:5-25), the
creation stories provide an image of a world diligently crafted and
purposefully designed by the supreme Deity―God. Practically all life
forms were accounted for in this religious masterpiece, and the details
show not just the end to which the universe is directed, but the

5 Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.

6 ―Darwinism,‖ accessed 25 June 2020: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism
7 Stephen, L., Platzner, H. and Platzner, G. 2004. Classical Mythology. New York:

McGraw-Hill Companies, p.59.

51
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

overwhelming intelligence of a caring God.8 Thus, creationism as it were,

accepts as true only explanations which rely on the creative accounts of
Genesis in the Christian Bible. In the 1920s, it was associated with the anti-
evolutionary crusade, and its advocates scoffed every scientific
explanation regarding the origins. The underlying motif is that life with
its convolutions couldn‘t be a bi-product of chance; it must have arisen
from a grand design with a purpose. The intricately-woven complex
reality must owe its existence to a super intelligent being―God.

As both creative and evolutionary accounts jostle for epistemic privilege,

the ordinary individual is condemned to a conundrum: admit that the
ordered universe is a product of a superlative Order in whom there is no
admixture of potentiality, but only actuality; or accept the ascription of
origin and functionality of life forms to mechanical fission of atoms, and
the consequent dispensation of order and finality. The consequences of
either choice are obvious and diverse. In one, the admission of a creator
God imposes values which enforcement promote the sanctity of human
life, the inviolability of certain rights, and the virtues mitigating actions
because of eschatological concerns. On the other, the acceptance of
evolutionary theory that dispenses with God, with the attendant rejection
of divinely ordained moral order, rejection of belief in cosmic or physical
order, denunciation of absolute values, and a denial of objective and
universally binding moral laws. 9 The former admission guarantees
restraint and order; while the latter is a recipe for nihilism which
endangers human lives and brazenly promotes the ―culture of death‖ in
our modern societies. Cultivating the ―culture of life‖ has never been
harder as it is in this nihilistic 21st century.

Diffusion, Dynamism―Springboards to Globalization of Culture

The term culture has been effusively used to delineate societal
underpinnings since the mid-15th century. In its much referenced span of
history, experts across sociological, anthropological and political fields
have sought to synthesize its frames, and thus provide a unified vision of
its meaning-content. In their critical review of multifarious notions and
descriptions of culture, the American anthropologists―Alfred Kroeber

8 Ogbujah, C. and Nkama, U. 2020. ―The Origin of Life Forms,‖ in C. Ogbujah (Ed.).
History and Philosophy of Science and Technology: A Reader. Port Harcourt: Pearl
Publishers, p. 150.
9 Ogbujah, C. (Ed.). 2020. History and Philosophy of Science and Technology: A Reader. Port

Harcourt: Pearl Publishers, p. vi.

52
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

and Clyde Kluckhohn amassed a whopping list of 164 definitions.10 There

is no doubt today, nearly three-quarter of a century afterwards, the
number would not have more than doubled. On the whole, it is still
possible to synthesize these conceptualizations into four related but
distinct strands namely, culture as cultivation; culture as episteme; culture
as history and culture as worldview.

Sifting through the rich literature, we are persuaded to acknowledge

Geert Hofstede‘s contribution that ―culture is the collective programming
of the mind which distinguishes the members of one category of people
from another.‖11 Our attraction to Hofstede‘s position is borne out of its
efforts at highlighting the centrality of the mind and its activities in the
delineation of peoples. The intellect is at the center of all human activities
and volitions, and thus releases its imprints on a people‘s way of life. But
given that there is material component to culture which though implied
but not explicit in the above characterization, we might well modify this
in saying that culture is a shared apperception in which identified groups
relish their physical and nonphysical values, and by which they are
stratified from one other. Our culture encompasses whatever we do, our
social institutions and our values; it determines who we are. The material
aspect of culture consists of tools, artifacts, buildings, written records, and
any other objects formed or used by humans; while the non-material
aspect includes ideas that people have concerning their culture, such as
beliefs, values, rules, norms, morals, language, organizations, etc.

Culture is an abstract and intricate but yet a simple concept. Its

abstractness, in the first instance, derives from the nature of its
manifestation which can hardly be seen nor touched. This abstruse
feature obviously constricts the possibility of contriving a proper
measurement for it; the intricacy factor is a logical consequence of the
abstractive nature: every obscure reality is ipso facto difficult to recognize.
Culture shares in the complexity of all theoretical or mental realities.
Conversely, culture is a simple concept as it is well understood with
regard to the referents in all societies: everyone within a group
understands what its elements denote or stand for within the group. As
every society has its peculiar ways of doing things, it means that different
societies have different cultures.

10 Kroeber, A. and Kluckhohn, C. 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and

Definitions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Museum.
11 Hofstede, G. 1984. ―National cultures and corporate cultures.‖ In L.A. Samovar & R.E.

Porter (Eds.), Communication Between Cultures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, p. 51.

53
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

Second, the abstractness or complexity of culture stems from its

dynamism. Culture is a dynamic phenomenon which is fluid and
consistently changing in subtle and diverse ways. The fluidity entails that
the multiple expressions of a cultural system might make it more difficult
to rightly identify the referents. In many cases, referents of cultural
expressions have changed within one generation of their emergence.
There is apparent symbiotic relationship between culture and society.
Culture cannot exist outside the society; and society cannot thrive without
a culture. The constant changes of different aspects of culture both
material (music, food, clothing, etc.), and nonmaterial (beliefs, values,
norms, etc.) show that culture is dynamic, flexible and adaptive. The
types of clothing we use today are different from the ones worn by our
fathers; so also our hairstyle, music, beliefs and values. Culture
continually evolves to meet current state of realities in the society. It is
never stagnant.

Cultural dynamism is the capacity of a culture to transmute from one

feature to another. This is often done to eliminate negative tendencies and
to provide relief to the local community. The abolition of slavery, of
killing of twins, and of human sacrifices in some African cultures is very
significant here. These cultural changes fostered universally acceptable
cultural norms and practices that help to create peace. But sometimes, the
outcome of cultural change can be negative, leading to the diminution of
life in society. The current liberal penchant for abortion, euthanasia, and
the glamorization of violence in social media are sweeping across the
world, and are aiding the espousal of a ―culture of death‖. Thanks to
these, it has become increasingly difficult to universally cultivate the
―culture of life‖.

The change in cultural practices is made possible by the ingrained quality

of culture to permeate societies and groups. In the course of history,
cultural items—such as music, art, ideas, religion, language, technology,
etc., have spread between individuals within a given culture or from one
culture to another. Such diffusions as in the use of automobiles in the 20th
century, and the social media in the 21st century have, to some extent,
highlighted the common humanity of all within the global village; the
possibility of a culture with a global reach. The capacity for cultural
diffusion―the spread of a cultural item over a wide area―complements
cultural dynamism in providing catalysts for globalization of cultures.
With advancements in transportation and communication, it was only a
matter of time for dynamic cultures to diffuse across the globe.

54
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

Even though cultural globalization―the standardization of cultural

expressions around the world―extends and intensifies social relations, it
is viewed as a trend toward homogeneity that will ultimately make
human experiences everywhere basically the same. 12 In modern world, it
is rife for local cultures to be transformed or absorbed into dominant
outside ones. This phenomenon has negatively impacted on national
identity and culture of subservient societies, caused a reduction in cultural
diversity,13 and could lead to global assimilation of a single culture.14 In
the past two decades, this has been the target of left-liberal penchant for
open borders and a single global government. Cultural globalization is an
instrument by which Western affluent cultures dominate and destroy the
values of other cultures of developing nations with their value systems. In
Nigeria, for instance, this can easily be noticed from the loss of ethical
decency. Prior to western influence, the epidemics of rape and premarital
sex were not part of her culture. It was a taboo to engage in these. But
now, the scale of these incidents cascading into endless abortions is
destroying the moral fabric of the nation.

With less competitive capacity, indigenous cultures struggle to cope with

cheap Western products like coca cola, confectionaries, etc., and values,
such as individualistic, capitalist and left-liberal tendencies, which
Western controlled media and outlets use to inundate their spaces. More
often than not, these indigenous cultures capitulate under the coercive
influence of foreign dominant ones. This somewhat ‗cultural imperialism‘,
reminiscent of its earlier forms in colonialism, is responsible for the
universal assimilation of western cultures, and the global spread of such
attendant maladies as abortion, euthanasia, violent dispositions (culture
of violence), rape, sexual promiscuity, etc.

Overcoming hurdles to Cultivating the Culture of life

Events of the last century show the twists and turns in human values, as
well as the scope of human depravity. The preponderance of violent
conflicts, enactment of positive laws that promote abortion, euthanasia,
capital punishment, etc., and the illicit exposure of small markets to the
hegemonic influence of globalized economies―all lead to diminution in
the quality of human lives and the eventual creation of a ―culture of

12 Watson, J. L. 2020. ―Cultural globalization‖, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, [website],

https://www.britannica.com/science/cltural-globalization, (accessed 30 June 2020).
13 Barker, B. 2008. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. SAGE, pp. 159–162.
14 Jennings, J. 2010. Globalizations and the Ancient World. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, p. 132.

55
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

death.‖ It is ironic that precisely when the inviolable value and rights of
the person are overtly trumpeted, the very right to life is being crushed,
especially at its very important moments: birth and death. 15 Through the
influence of globalization, this culture of death has fast diffused across the
world. To counteract these, we urgently need to engage in actions that
defend lives, rewrite the story and promote the ―culture of life.‖

The first major challenge to cultivating the ‗culture of life‘ arises from the
global glamorization of violent conflict. Ever since ―Cain rose up against
his brother Abel, and killed him‖ (Gen 4:8), accounts of violence and
murder are rewritten daily in our history, with inexorable and degrading
frequency. Human history is replete with humongous details of fatalities
from ‗state-based‘ conflicts, ‗non-state‘ conflicts (where two or more
organizations are fighting but no state is involved), and also ‗one-sided
conflicts‘―that is, where there is only one organized aggressor, such as in
murder, suicidal or genocidal violence. The provocative dress-up of
violence by film industries and the social media seems to glamorize the
culture of death as the new norm. As in the first fratricide committed by
Cain, the kinship of ―flesh and blood‖ is frequently violated within the
context of family bonds, as is seen in abortion or euthanasia; and within
the broader context of the human family, as we witness from wars,
genocides, homicides and all forms of violent conflicts. As all humans
share equally in essential dignity and grace arising from their nature,
every murder therefore, violates the ‗mystical kinship‘ that bonds
humanity, and complicates the efforts at cultivating the culture of life.

The situation is much more intricate when there are economic, ethnic or
religious dimensions to it. Religion and ethnicity have been major sources
of violence and deaths in the world, but the existence of conflict
entrepreneurs―those, who profit from conflict, means eliminating
violence is much more challenging. Ranging from companies that
manufacture arms and ammunitions, to those that hire mercenaries for
illicit businesses, there is great impetus for killing and violence. The
current spate of insecurity in Nigeria resulting from armed robbery,
kidnapping and political assassination can be pinned to financial
incentives of the agents. The unabated massacre in the North east by Boko
Haram, and in the Middle belt by Fulani herders, are apparently part of
this economic scheme. Politicians and high military commands exploit the
weak institutions for economic and political gains. A quick resolution of
the conflict means an end to huge monetary appropriations in their

15 John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 17, Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

56
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

offices. With unfettered access to national treasury, unscrupulous leaders

are incentivized to endlessly engage with insurgents, notwithstanding the
human costs.

Another significant hurdle is the neo-liberal (left-liberal) individualistic

tendency and its potential for relativization of reality. Being a civil and
moral idea that was hinged on liberty and equality, classical liberalism
underlined inclusivity in an era that was fractured by classism, and gave
rise to scientific-technological breakthroughs which, led to increase in
living standards and social progress. These are giant feats worthy of
commendation. But the neo-liberal construal of liberty for license, and the
subsequent denunciation of objective values, places in every individual‘s
hands the sole powers of ascription: reality assumes whatever meaning
man assigns to it. Having thus, relativized reality, the age-long sublime
universal ideals of truth, good, beauty, etc., are emptied of every vestige
of objective content. Truth, for instance, becomes that which works for
and/or that which is accepted by an individual or group. This renaissance
of Heraclitan mantra――man is the measure of all things…‖ in neo-liberal
projects meant that otherwise objectively condemned acts like abortion,
euthanasia, suicide, etc., must now be evaluated through the prism of
individual agents. This form of ethical relativism demands that the State
should not interfere in moral issues, but limit itself to creating enabling
space for individuals to flourish in their private choices. The implication is
that not only are humans expected to deal with moral issues as private
matters, they are now required to challenge any positive law that
prohibits such.

In today‘s world, the practice of jurisprudence has taken a new

dimension. Owing to the rigour involved in constitutional amendments
in most countries, neo-liberals now resort to the use of courtrooms as a
short-cut for the advancement of left-liberal ideals. Practices which
hitherto were prohibited in virtually all positive laws, and for which
society held agents with disdain, are today being glamorized because
jurists have given them legal force. Through the ‗packing of the courts,‘
politicians are able to widen the elasticity of constitutional provisions to
accommodate their neo-liberal ideals, and in the process endanger and
harass faith-based groups that had worked for the promotion of human
lives over the centuries. Under the cover of inclusivity, these groups are
now prohibited from enforcing rules that promoted the culture of life. In
some cases (as in Obamacare), they are coerced into providing medical
insurance that guarantees free birth control (abortion) to their employees.
In others, there is a revival of capital punishment and a support for

57
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

somewhat Promethean attitude in assisted suicide (euthanasia). These

legislations sneakily empower governments across the world to use
taxpayer‘s funds in promoting the culture of death. To facilitate the
spread of abortion, for instance, huge sums of money are being invested
in the production of pharmaceuticals that enable mothers to eliminate
fetuses in their wombs without recourse to medical assistance. It is ironic
that in an age bogged with debilitating infections, scientific research is
absorbed in developing products that make it easy to suppress life, and
thus remove abortion from social control or responsibility. 16

Sequel to the global promotion of left-liberal individualistic values is the

illicit exposure of small markets to the hegemonic influence of globalized
economies. In its search for cheap labour, raw materials and markets for
finished products, globalization opened the frontiers for companies to
outsource labour to foreign lands. In this way, China and many
developing nations have profited from Western companies, especially in
the areas of employment, and the provision of basic amenities for their
citizens. But, at the same time, analyses show many of these developing
nations have sunk deeper into economic chaos due to globalization. Apart
from the havoc of paying unjust wages to local labour force, indigenous
firms are often grounded because they cannot withstand stiff competition
from the multinationals. This usually leads to job losses, increase in
poverty rate, and the attendant spread of diseases and death. In their
quest for profit maximization, conglomerates deny poor indigenous
companies access to development, or make such access dependent on
arbitrary prohibitions that ultimately aggravate injustice and violence that
degrade human lives.

For the most part, the foregoing has exposed the extent at which the
―culture of death‖ is entrenched in our societies, and by extension, the
enormity of the challenge to cultivating a ―culture of life.‖ No doubt the
hurdles are many, but the key to prevailing lies in our hands―in
developing the ethics of human affection; of humane relationships. As
living organisms, humans possess qualities for which they are inextricably
strung together under humanity. By virtue of intelligence and free will,
they are able to coordinate their activities; through introspection, they
transcend other beings and are open to each other in convivial
relationships. Whether in the sense of Aristotelian ―social being‖ or
Heideggerian ―being-with‖, no human being can exist and thrive in
isolation of others. Our lives are always entwined with each other. My

16 John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 13, Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

58
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

humanity is intricately caught up with those of others; ‗we belong to a

bundle of life,‘ as Desmond Tutu 17 would say. Since we belong to a
greater whole and are enhanced or diminished when others‘ lives are
enhanced or diminished, we must then cultivate a culture of life by
developing humane relationships.

A humane relationship sprouts from humane people. A humane person is

an individual with great affection and care for others; one who especially
tries to alleviate another‘s suffering. The myriad promoters of the culture
of death nay murder, violent conflicts, greed, selfishness, and wickedness
are all antithetical to the ethics of human affection. To cultivate the culture
of life, we must use love to conquer hatred; affection for racial prejudice;
contentment for greed and selfishness; and dialogue for violent conflicts.
This task must begin by reinventing education to forms consciences that
appreciate the common heritage of humanity, and the inviolable worth of
every human life.

Primordiality of the Culture of life in a Glocalized World.

There is no doubt globalization has opened the frontiers for companies to
outsource businesses, create jobs in remote places, and bring the world
together in one universal village. There is no doubt also that indigenous
communities and developing nations have borne the greater burden of
this adventure. Globalization, as Tomlinson argues, leads to
homogenization, 18 and cultural homogenization is the recipe for
attenuation of indigenous cultures and the reduction of cultural diversity.
To diminish friction and allow for ethnic cultures to thrive within the
spectrum of the globalized village, what is needed is
glocalization―adoption of elements of global culture to suit local ones.
Glocalization or ‗cultural heterogenization‘ is a process in acculturation
that grants no epistemic privilege to any culture, but allows native
cultures to indigenize relevant elements of the global culture.

The ―culture of life‖ as often contrasted to the ―culture of death‖, is a

catch phrase in moral theology which can be traced to the first century
writing, the Didache. The Didache―an anonymous early Christian treatise
that first presents the genre of Church Orders―proclaims the existence of
two paths: one of life and the other of death. The path to life deals with
the love of God, and love of neighbour as oneself, which among other

17Tutu, D. 1999. No Future Without Forgiveness. London: Rider.

18Tomlinson, J. Cultural Imperialism: A Critical Introduction. London: Continuum. pp. 45–
50.

59
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

things, forbids acts of anger, murder, killing of a child by abortion, etc.

Over the years, these prescriptions ossified into what today we call the
―Golden Rule‖. The path to death is evil and is taken by those who
indulge in acts prohibited by the good.19 The paths to life and death are
what today we term the ―culture of life‖ and the ―culture of death.‖

In his influential encyclical Evangelium Vitae―“The Gospel of Life,” the

polish (Karol Wojtyla) Pope John Paul II vigorously decried the crimes
and attacks against human life, and railed on its widespread backing from
a broad section of the society, the jurists and certain sectors of healthcare
personnel. Drawing inspiration from the Pastoral Constitution on the
Church in the Modern World―Gaudium et Spes, he labeled as promoting
the culture of death:

Whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder,

genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or willful self-destruction,
whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as
mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to
coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as
subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment,
deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and
children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where
people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as
free and responsible persons; all these things and others like
them are criminal: they poison human society….20

In opposition to these ‗criminal actions that poison human society‘, Pope

John Paul II developed an ethic that is hinged on the promotion of life and
wellbeing of every human being. His creation of the concept of the
―culture of life‖ illumined Catholic social teachings on abortion,
euthanasia, capital punishment and what he termed the ancient scourges
of poverty, hunger, endemic diseases, violence and war, thus:
In our present social context, marked by a dramatic struggle
between the culture of life and the culture of death, there is the
need to develop a deep critical sense capable of discerning true
values and authentic needs. What is urgently called for is a
general mobilization of consciences and a united ethical effort to

19 Cross, F. L. (Ed.). 2005. ―Didache‖, in The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church.
New York: Oxford University Press.
20 Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World―Gaudium et Spes, 27.

60
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

activate a great campaign in support of life. All together, we

must build a new culture of life.21

The new culture of life is one that gives everyone the opportunity to live
and thrive from conception to natural death; it is one which, recognizing
every human being as the living image of God, accords them inviolable
rights under the law. The new culture of life adapts principles of the
global culture into local situations to preserve and care for life according
to the law of reciprocity: giving and receiving, self-giving and the
acceptance of others. The culture of life values each person as a person,
and not for what they own, do, or produce nor for their intelligence,
beauty or health; and must defend every human life, especially the weak
and those at great risks.22 As social beings, our lives are entwined with
each other in interdependent manner such that the infliction of pain or
dishonour to one results in the diminution of the lives of others. In
nutshell, activating the culture of life implies living out the imports of
―being our brother‘s / sister‘s keeper.‖ By the same token, it forbids
individuals, governments and healthcare providers from arbitrary
manipulation of life, or from even becoming agents of death. It cautions
against the loss of intrinsic ethics in our actions, especially in today‘s
world seeped in secularist culture.

Since its coinage, the term ―culture of life‖ has gained popularity among
theologians and politicians, and has turned out into a movement against
policies and practices that threaten human existence. Much as we earlier
admitted that ‗life is a beautiful gift bestowed on organisms‘, there is no
denying that human life is the most precious gift nature could ever
receive, and as such must be jealously protected. Perhaps, there isn‘t a
more forceful support to this from secular world leaders than the
sentiments expressed in George W. Bush‘s Presidential debate at Boston,
October 3, 2000:
Surely this nation can come together to promote the value of life.
Surely we can fight off these laws that will encourage doctors or
allow doctors to take the lives of our seniors. Surely, we can
work together to create a culture of life so some of these
youngsters who feel like they can take a neighbour‘s life with a
gun will think otherwise.23

21John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 95. Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
22 John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 23, 77, Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
23 ―Presidential Candidate Debate: Presidential Debate in Boston‖, October 03, 2000. The

American Presidency Project. [website],

61
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

The goal of the ―culture of life‖ movement is to see that values that
promote life are enshrined in societal laws and policies. The intent is, by
educational and political policies, to inscribe these sacred values into art,
literature, media and music, which over time will transform the attitudes
and behaviours of the citizenry. This culture of life―the fruit of the culture
of truth and of love,24 has the potential to engender courageous cultural
dialogue among different nations and thus help to adopt the elements of
global culture to suit local needs.

Conclusion
It is obvious today, as in the time of biblical Moses, 25 we are beset by two
choices: life and death, prosperity and disaster. Like the Israelites, we
must choose and promote the ―culture of life‖ over the ―culture of death.‖
A society that promotes the Culture of Life will gear all efforts towards
the protection of human life in all stages: from conception to natural
death. This will entail, at the social level, repeal of unjust laws that
encourage behaviours that oppress or diminish life; and at the individual
level, a personal rejection of abortion, euthanasia, suicide and other
violent behaviours that endanger human lives 26. Freedom must not be
construed as license, but a condition that liberates us to pursue what is
truly good, just and sublime, in rejection of what is evil.

To cultivate the culture of life in this globalized world, we must use the
instruments of technology to reinvent education on the values and worth
of life. Arts and literature must capture the intrinsic dignity of human life
by displaying fetuses, the elderly, handicapped, and the ill as full and
worthy members of society; while the often sensational left-liberal media
reportage should rather focus on creating a new awareness that is ever
more opposed to war as a means of conflict resolution. To cultivate the
culture of life, we must encourage initiatives that support people who are
weak and defenceless; discover ever more effective remedies for the
unborn, the suffering and the terminally ill; develop a more equitable

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-debate-boston, (accessed
4 July 2020).
24 John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 77, Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
25 Deuteronomy 30: 15.
26 Kanu, Ikechukwu A., ―Igbo Philosophy Of Life Vis-À-Vis the Proliferation Of Prayer

Houses In Southeast Nigeria: A Phenomenological Study‖. Journal of African Studies and

Sustainable Development. Vol. 2. No. 2, 2020; Kanu, Ikechukwu A. & B. A. C. Obiefuna,
“The Value of Life in African Ontology and Global Bio-ethical Discourse‖. Published in
the Nigerian Journal of Theology. June, Vol. 27. pp. 126-146, 2013.

62
IGWEBUIKE: An African Journal of Arts and Humanities. Vol. 6. No. 5. ISSN:
2488-9210 (Print) 2504-9038 (Online) 2020.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Tansian University

means of wealth distribution to carter for the needy; and bring quick relief
to those affected by natural disasters, epidemics or wars. It will entail
finding means to suppress crime without denying criminals the
opportunity to reform; paying attention to ecological problems, and the
willful refusal to take part in crimes and acts of injustice. 27 To defend and
promote a culture of life is a service of love which we must all be
committed to, if humanity is to survive this 21st century.

27John Paul II. 1995. Evangelium Vitae, 77, 97. Vatican: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

63