The maiden publication of this journal in December 2013 met with unprecedented challenges which have now been fully addressed. This explains the reason for the delay of the subsequent publications till date. However, in order not to have a lacuna in the numbering and dating of our publications, the present edition is made to cover a period of two years: 2014-2015; and as it were, it consists of two volumes in one: volumes 2 & 3. From a certain perspective, the delay appears beneficial to the overall quality of the journal because it gave the editorial crew the opportunity to carefully select very insightful and thoughtprovoking articles that deal with a wide range of issues in the domains of philosophy and public life.Prof. Okonkwo’s article opens this special edition by making a penetrating and phenomenological scrutiny into the centrality of the concept “Ihe” in Igbo worldview, and concludes that the concept makes for a nexus between philosophy and science, between thought and action in the socio-intellectual life of the Igbo-African.Prof. Ludger Jansen takes up a rather problematic metaphysical issue when he examines “the fullness of being” in relation to the two variations of nominalism and how they are relevant to metaphysics and ontology - variations that are considered to be nevertheless unsatisfactory from religious andphilosophical perspectives.Dr. Wence Madu writes from an urgent need to improve the basic food and cash crops of his people in the sub-saharan Africa, underscoring the difficulties involved, but more importantly, demonstrating the possibility of such an improvement through the insights from biochemical science and technology.Prof. Ndukwe’s contribution is a starling scientific breakthrough because he attempts to show the inadequacy and unhealthy nature of the present air-conditioned facilities being sold in the markets today. On the contrary, he makes a prolonged research into an alternative that is more natural and humane through a modern packaging of the cooling substance in the natural raffia palm; an alternative that is both environmentally friendly and healthier to human beings.Prof. Sherlock invites his readers into profound and multifaceted reflection on our inclinations in making choices and decisions; inclinations that are dependent on a basic criterion, namely: the question of value. He then discusses the complexity of the language of value and finally settles for a particular language of value.Dr. Ezenwankwor, like Sherlock, takes up another dimension of the ways we act in the society. It concerns the harm we do to others – their moral and legal implications. Anchoring his discourse on Joel Feinberg, he dwells on the evil of profound offense which deserves the attention of criminal law andcannot be equated with any kind of harm.Dr. Obasi focuses on a particular phenomenon that is found everywhere today: the issue of violence. He attempts a holistic approach to the problem by suggesting that the policies which perpetuate corruption, support unemployment and create poverty must be addressed, restructured and transformed if violence is to be drastically reduced.Dr. Ogbozo re-examines a philosophical discourse that purports to have a scientific spirit and character. He leans on the attempt made by Edmund Husserl in his phenomenological project which is an attempt to establish a presuppositionless scientific philosophy. Ogbozo’s re-examination of the Husserlian position appreciates the enormous efforts made by Husserl in this direction, but observes that a complete presuppositionless philosophy of any kind is better appreciated as a theory/guide rather than as an actuality.Dr. Kanu’s article on “Traditional African democracy” argues against notable opinions that democracy is an imported ‘political product’ from the Western world. He substantiates his position by discussing in particular some recognizable democratic elements in Yoruba and Igbo traditional political systems.The Discussion forum is centred on the first article: the ‘Ihe Phenomenology’. There are two responses to the premier article. The first response by Chielozona takes a very critical look at ‘Ihe phenomenology’ and does not find any substantial difference between the content of the article and the content of the essay “Das Ding” by Martin Heidegger many years ago. The second response by Ogbozo attempts a reconciliatory position in what he calls: ‘Ihe-language’ and a meta-phenomenology of participatory invisibles’.