Republic of the Philippines

SOUTHERN LEYTE STATE UNIVERSITY TOMAS OPPUS

San Isidro, Tomas Oppus, Southern Leyte

REVIEW MATERIAL IN PHILOSOPHY

Frederick C. Aniga, Ph.D.
Lecturer
Target LET Competency 1: To make an analysis on the nature of the Filipino, the
Filipino society and the emerging Filipino philosophy.
Target LET Competency 2: Manifest a critical and analytical attitude toward specific
issues and problem in daily life.
Philosophy defined
Philosophy is a term coming from two Greek terms: philo which means friend or
lover, and sophia which means wisdom or knowledge. Philosophy then is love for
wisdom. Philosophy is also seen as a reflective technique applied to lived experience
(Bauzon, 1994). Consequently, a philosopher is someone who is reflective of his
experiences and draw knowledge or wisdom from it.
Philosophy judges reality from the viewpoint of the total context (Bauzon, 1994).
Further, it acts as the guiding light to science which is the dominant source of knowledge
at the present. It unifies knowledge by ordering things in relation to one another and in
relation to the whole.
Bauzon further pointed out that philosophy is necessary to humanize the sciences,
to regulate the sciences in view to mans growth and development.
Philosophy in Relation to Education
Education, according to Bauzon (1994), has to do with influencing man to
become what he ought to be. Man is what he is because of what he was and because of
his relationships with other people and with his changing environment. It must
necessarily be anthropocentric. It must aim at wisdom of the intellectual and of the will.
Moreover, education must develop the freeman who must participate intelligently in the
affairs of society. He must be capable of responding to his obligation as a free man;
possessing a sense of responsibility, and knowing how to use leisure properly.
The Philippine Philosophy of Education
It has been an assumption that the educational system of the Philippines has been
modeled after the educational system of the United States. Many of the leading
educational thinkers in the Philippines have been substantially subscribing to their
American counterparts, especially John Dewey. To illustrate this, Bauzon quoted Isidro
who wrote:
In consonance with her enlightened colonial policy, America
established in the Philippines a school system patterned after her own.
Educational aims formulated by American educators and put into practice
in American Schools were adopted for Philippines Schools. Except for
adaptations of teaching materials to Filipino children, the Philippine
School system, since organization, has been a replica of the state school
system in the United States (Isidro, 1949).
American Thinkers who Influenced the Philippines Philosophy of Education
Benjamin Franklin His pragmatism and curiosity influenced American schools
towards functionalism and wanted his students to become useful members
of society. To achieve this goal, he prescribed early training for the special
field in which they were to work later on.

Thomas Jefferson he fought hard for a universal free education.

Horrace Mann The father of American public school system, he authored the move to
finance schools by means of public taxes.
John Dewey He is the most influential American educator-philosopher who
revolutionized the educational patterns in the United States. Dewey was
modernist, and as such, he made a vigorous objection to the rigid methods
of traditionalism and essentialism during his days. He introduced to the
world the word progressivism in education (Bauzon, 1994).
The Filipino Thinkers and Educators
Jose Rizal His main preoccupation was the formation of a new national community, the
Filipino nation. For him, education is indispensable to the task of nationbuilding and must occupy top priority. The weakness of the national moral
character must be first remedied by the leaders of the mew emerging
nation through moral education. He also saw the necessity of setting up
schools for his countrymen and envisioned the task of nation building as
dependent upon education which must aim for moral regeneration.
Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, the Katipunan The Katipunan, a secret society in
the early days of the Philippine Revolution placed a high premium on
ethical behavior as a requirement in achieving its goal of union of vision
and purpose and national emancipation through education. Bonifacios
Decalogue or Katungkulan Gagawin ng mga Anak ng Bayan finds
expression in love of ones country and neighbor. The Decalogue ends by
affirming that the aims of the Katipunan were God-given and that the
desires of the country were the desires of God. Jacintos Kartilya
emphasized the dignity of every Filipino as a human being. Work is
something one has to be proud of. Jacinto condemned the excesses of the
wealthy for their love of the easy-go-lucky lifestyle and their bad habits.
Apolinario Mabini A revolution which is external and internal must be grounded upon
sound moral education, and sound moral education must stand on solid
principles. According to Mabini, love of country was second only to love
of God. The individual must develop his faculties of the intellect and the
will. He must to muster his talents so that he may contribute to the cause
of justice, the common good and human progress.
Manuel L. Quezon Quezons philosophy of education is essentially local or Philippine
in orientation. Accordingly, there are two objectives of the Philippines
Education: (1) education for better citizenship, and (2) education as a
means of livelihood. Quezon envisioned a complete and adequate system
of public instruction. He stressed compulsory education in a free public
primary education and in citizenship training for adults. For higher
education, he believed that only those intellectually capable must go
through a college or university education while average student should b
encouraged to pursue vocational education. He should not be ashamed of
it because true worth of a man is not in his diploma but in his proficiency
in his chosen line of work.
Teodoro M. Kalaw He wrote the Cinco Reglas de Nuestra Moral Antigua. It
prescribed five traits of the traditional Filipino character such as: courage,
chastity, courtesy, self-control, and family unity. It is the duty of schools to
develop these virtues.

Camilo Osias His philosophy centered on what he called the tayo concept (we
pluralized or communal). Dr. Osias believes that education must secure
for every Filipino the fullest measure of efficiency, freedom, and
happiness. Efficiency implies cooperation with ones fellowmen in order
to pursue the common good. Furthermore, the school system must
contribute its share in achieving the goals of education by inculcating in
the hearts and minds of the young the value of preserving the patrimony of
the nation.
Vicente Sinco, Francisco Dalupan, and Conrado Aquino - They pointed out the need
for liberal education in order to produce truly educated Filipinos as they
observed deficiency of the education preparatory to college and university
studies. For this option, there is a need for the youth to be adequately
educated of the elementary and high school levels. Moreover, Sinco
envisioned the need for well-trained teachers as one of the essential factors
to improve the quality of the educational program in schools. On this need,
he stressed the necessity of courses that would give teachers liberal
education while at the same time giving them adequate mastery of the
subject they teach.
Pedro Orata and Florencio Fresnoza The direct aim of education, according to Orata
is the direct development of character development, all-around character
and well-adjusted personality. He further stressed that vocational
education is given expression in the education Act of 1982 which
mandates manpower training.
Rafael Palma The primary purpose of education, Palma said, is to develop the
individual to his higest efficiency so that he can be of use to himself and to
the community. Such a concept is based on the philosophy of altruism and
is closely allied to citizenship.
Herman Gregorio He campaigned for a learner-centered educative process. He also
envisioned an educational environment wherein the theory of self-activity
is the basis of all learning and where the development of the whole child is
the primary objective of education. The aims of education are formulated
in terms of child growth and development and that the school curriculum
is organized in terms of activities and projects. Moreover, teaching must
emphasize thinking and reasoning rather than memorization.
Jorge Bacobo He pointed out that the bases of education in the Philippines are the
Filipino socio-cultural values and traditions. In order to arrive at a truly
educated Filipino, the spirit of nationalism and love of country must serve
as the foundation of education.
Jose P. Laurel He stressed that a free and soveriegn country should provide for an
educational system that is responsive to the needs of the people and
adapted to thier idiosyncracies, customs, traditoins, and basic principles.
He envisioned an educational program geared exclusively to the needs and
problems of the individual and persistently maintained that inculcation of
desirable virtues and social values is the best vehicle in national
transformation and productive citizenry.
Emerita Quito A distinguished woman thinker, Dr. Quito recommends on using
Filipino language in the teaching of philosophy and philosophy of
education.
The Psychology of the Filipino
The Filipino is struggling to be himself (Andres, 1989), While accepting the fact
that he is a product of Eastern and Western culture, there is a necessity to liberate himself
from the dominion of colonial rule. One well-known educator affirmed that the Filipino
heart, mind and soul are controlled by three aggrupations. They are the Vatican with

respect to faith and morals, the conference of Islamic nations with respect to national
integration and/or segregation, and the United States of America with respect to business,
industry and economy.
Dr. Ricardo S. Soler (1972) as quoted by Andres (1989) says that the principal
cause of the present economic conditions may be attributed to the negativism in the
Filipino national personality. This negativism in turn creates a crisis of national identity
and a crisis of national self-confidence. He points out that even in simple conversation;
the Filipino intentionally turns away from the positive and toward the negative. He is
uncomfortable with his own merit. He cannot quite accept his own sense of worth.
Filipino negativism is reflected in the tendency of the Filipino to identify with the
underdog. He attributes his success to luck, good fortune, chance or the will of God
because he believes he cannot take care of himself, thus, indicating that the negative
holds a strange fascination for the Filipino.
Moreover, for years teachers, parents, priests, pastors and elders have taught
children the motto Honesty is the best policy without examining the Filipino culture
and values profoundly. Our Philippine culture is a culture of shame (hiya), not of guilt or
sin. For the Filipino, the person (tao) is more important than the truth (katotohanan).
The major cause of the negativism of the Filipino in his values is the inferiority
complex injected into his consciousness and imposed upon him by his colonizers
(Andres, 1998).
The Filipino
The Filipino goes along with things, bends with fate rather than stands against
things. He has the qualities of flexibility and endurance.
The Filipino is as pliant as a bamboo. This pliancy has caused him to be
ambiguous and situational. He shifts gear so easily. He may denounce and decry a
political leader, but in a face-to-face encounter with the same person and at the realization
that there is some chance of benefiting from him, he fawns upon him.
The mind of the Filipino is pliant like the bamboo. It is resilient. It can be filled
with truth; with stern, uncompromising ideals; with wisdom. It can be empty if not filled
at the start. His resiliency helps to maintain his good-naturedness and good sense and
ability to achieve a measure of recovery and progress under the most discouraging
barriers. Resiliency made the Filipino people such a hardy and indomitable race that they
survived the soft and insidious corruption and patent inadequacy of his colonizers and
neo-colonizers.
The heart of the Filipino is like a bamboo. It is susceptible and soft. In the
beginning, it is trusting, it is innocent. It can be filled with goodness and usefulness. But
it can be hardened with hatred and meanness. It can be polluted with sin and corruption.
The Filipino heart can be merciful or maunawain. It can easily sympathize with the weak,
the sick, the dejado. But once the Filipino heart is betrayed, it is capable of vengeance
and the most cruel revenge. The Filipino can maintain his patience and endurance in the
face of adversity.
The Filipino Family
The Filipino family has been influenced by both Oriental and Occidental traits.
The father assumes the patriarchal control as contrasted with the wifes role as the family
treasurer. Authority in the family is determined not only by sex but also by age, with the
grandparents playing an influential role. After the parents, the oldest child exercises
authority over the rest.
The concern for family and relatives is peculiarly strong among Filipinos. There is
a tradition where older members of the family support their younger siblings through
high school and college.
The Filipino family is consanguinal in that it revolves around the principle of
kinship. It recognizes relationship with cousins far remote and takes them into the
household as family members if called upon to do so. The size of the family is extended
moreover by the compadre system.

Children are considered economic assets. They are sent to school but are expected
to serve their parents in return.
Education and Values
Most Filipinos have the notion that to be educated is to have a better life. It is a
gateway to becoming rich. Education becomes then for some Filipinos a means simply to
accumulate wealth. Education is no longer a preparation for life, or an avenue to develop
skills but rather, it is a means to get a diploma or a degree for the purpose of earning
money. The diploma is a symbol sought after as a guarantee for a lucrative job. This
diploma mentality created a disdain for manual labor. Persons trained to work in farms
refuse to work there and prefer an office job somewhere in the government. And
sometimes, the knowledge acquired is used in a foreign land, not to the benefit of ones
country.
Brain Drain
A great number of Filipinos have left, are leaving or planning to leave the
Philippines to work in other countries. Many Filipino doctors, nurses and professionals
go to Europe and other Western countries to seek jobs.
Brain drain is an intellectual migration from ones country or locality to a
destination of economic and intellectual stability. The causes of brain drain are the
following:
1. The attraction of higher pay which foreign countries offer to Filipino doctors,
nurses, researchers and other professionals.
2. The easy way of life in the Western countries.
3. Job opportunities abroad are very tempting especially to young, talented
professionals.
The Philippine Society
A society, according to Andres (1998) is made up of individuals who interact with
each other in a shared pattern of customs, beliefs, values and traditions. The Philippines
as a society is divided into four classes:
a. Upper Class comprises only two percent of the Filipinos. The large land owners,
highly successful professionals, big time businessmen, and top government
officials belong to this class.
b. Middle Class They comprise about 12 percent of our people. Minor government
officials, some teachers, most businessmen, and owners of medium-size lands
belong to this class.
c. Upper-lower Class They comprise about 32 percent of our people. Skilled
laborers, government clerks, some teachers, some sari-sari store owners, small
farmers, store clerks, some tenant workers and farmers, and most office workers
belong to this class.
d. Lower Class They comprise about 55 percent of the people. Unskilled laborers,
farmer-owners with less than two hectares of land, most tenant farmers, landless
farm laborers, most of the physically handicapped and household servants belong
to this class.
Class is defined by wealth, income, education, heredity, standard of living, circle
of friends, pattern of etiquette and occupation.