Showing posts with label Filipino traits and values. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Filipino traits and values. Show all posts

Monday, January 23, 2012

SPLIT-LEVEL CHRISTIANITY by Fr.Jaime Bulatao,S.J. (1966) - Part 2 of 2


"Many Filipinos are what I call Sunday-religious, that is they go to church every Sunday, take in confession and communion, but the rest of the week they bribe and do corrupt deeds..." - Dr. Pura Santillan-Castrence

*****************************************
NOTES TO READERS:  Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr,Twitter,Facebook, etc. THANKS!!
Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:
****************************************


PART 2 OF 2:

Hi All,

Fr. Bulatao, S.J.'s essay is a synthesis of Christian/Catholic theology and social science thus expectedly with a Christian spin in it, especially on this Part 2 of 2; posted here in its entirety for consistency, that is, as he has originally written it.

However, I personally think and believe that [personal and social] ethics and morality do NOT necessarily emanate only out of having a religion or being a believer in a "God" (for us: the monotheistic Christian God as traditionally or Biblically understood or other). 

There are atheists, agnostics, pagans, non-Christians and what have you who were/are more ethical/moral and unselfishly act for social justice than those who are self-proclaimed or supposedly religious Christians of various shades: Catholics, mainline Protestants, Pentecostals or Evangelicals.

In short, I believe in the possibility of a Godless morality, though I admit that it is much more difficult to attain. With religion that stresses fear of supernatural justice or retribution, then believers will tend to follow what they think or are taught as God's (or gods') will.

- BERT



To see Part 1, Click to open/read --->: Split-level Christianity, Part 1 of 2



It's been almost 40 years ago when at 19, I first read this enlightening essay on "split-level" Christianity by Fr. Jaime Bulatao, S.J.. Given the interest on Filipino ethical/moral values, I am posting it here.

Fast forward today, I find that the given situational samples in the essay were quite "simple" and "mild." In fact, I find them almost laughable compared to the excessiveness and gravity that characterize "split-leveling" in current times. 


Anyway, the bottom line is that "split-leveling" by a self-proclaimed Christian is to be unChristian (vis-a-vis what I understand as being Christian from my years of Catholic upbringing).

As to the Catholic Church, it is amusing, at best, to wonder why the Catholic Church, despite its dominant influence in the homeland, seems to have failed to instill what it always claim to develop: "the whole person," alluding to the so-called "higher needs" such as those theorized under Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs”.

Given the prevailing social conditions in our so-called only Christian country in Asia, they only demonstrate that the church, despite its proclamation of being the "church of/for the Poor," has consistently and continually failed in its mission to teach and lead the Filipino Christians to live its social teachings.

[BTW, comparatively speaking I would qualify that there are Christians, i.e. American Protestant variety (AP), more specifically Pentecostal/Evangelical Protestants, who can not be expected to care or act for social justice issues as their essential belief system does not put value on social works; since for APs: "personal salvation" depended SOLELY on absolute faith in Jesus (i.e. good works do not count.]

Has our Catholic Church in the homeland been stressing something else
 than addressing our present social realities, of our illiterate, ignorant and impoverished majority? How come Filipino Catholicism is more concerned about its religious liturgy and tradition and personal piety than its proclaimed concern/message of social justice? 

Such attitude and behavior have only made our homeland Christianity an effective and efficient nurturer of hypocrisy among its hierarchy and followers.

Fr. Bulatao's essay, though written almost two generations ago, is still very relevant in gaining knowledge and understanding of our Filipino selves and maybe even lead to changes to better ourselves in terms of acting for social justice -- not towards empty religiosity-- and a better homeland society for most, if not all, subsequent generations


initially posted only that part which exemplified "split-leveling" and labeled Part 1. However I have noted that the subject matter has been/is very popular among visitors. I now include hereunder Part 2, which deals with Catholic theology and social science/psychology to explain the "why" behind split-leveling and "how" it can be overcome, and with practical emphasis on the role of priest/minister as a facilitator/role model in inculcating authentic Christian/Catholic social morality in actual living/real life.


I guess the popularity of the postings on Filipino values stems from our desire for:  learning, deeper understanding and finding solutions to the continuing national predicaments being inflicted on the lives of past and present generations of the native Filipino majority, appreciating and realizing that a significant part of the problem is ourselves (us Filipinos).  I think and believe that  many of our national problems are created and/or heightened, knowingly or unknowingly, by our so-called Filipino Norm of Morality.


Let us hope and  work for, in our own little way at the very least, this realization to come sooner (as it is almost too late), and recognize the need for changes in our Filipino traits and values:  to employ the positive and dampen the negative potentials in our Filipino Value System, and appreciate the less selfish or higher need for a strong sense of national community which we desperately miss, expressed in terms of national unity, i.e. nationalism; the sine qua non for national progress, that is, the attainment of the common good.

-Bert


*********************************************



Continuation as Part 2 of 2:


Why unconscious
Why is the incongruence of the two levels not felt? A probable reason is the nature of the top level, namely its conceptual quality. It works merely in the realm of symbols, not of existential reality. Hence their is a feeling of unrealism about it. In Dr. Jocano's example, the respondent when challenged on the incongruity of his having agreed with the pastor on Sunday and his actual behavior during the week said: " That is what he (the pastor) has to say." 

There is a feeling that the authority figure is only saying what he says out of a sense of obligation, not because things are so. Only two contrary experiences can bring about awareness of the problem. As long as one side remains on the level of concept, the problem is not felt. The incongruence remains unconscious.


Another way of looking at the same thing is to say that perhaps the culture lacks actual models in whom the split has been overcome. In their absence, society takes the split for granted as if it expected that people would always be so. Thus schoolchildren in Manila are taught not to cross the street while they see a red light facing them, but they take for granted that no one need follow such seemingly arbitrary rules, which apply to cars but not to pedestrians. 

Only when adults have learned to wait for the light to turn green before crossing the street --only then will the schoolchildren become conscious of the incongruity of running across a street while the red light is on, becaue by then they will have models within society who will teach them what the abstract school atmosphere cannot teach. But as long as incongruence is taken for granted as normal, it will remain unconscious.


Reason for the Separation of the Two Levels
Why do the two levels remain separate? Modern psychology may give the answer. "Learning is specific to a situation." One learns a response to a particular stimulus, and does not give the same response to another stimulus unless the second stimulus is experienced as similar to the first. So too, where one set of responses, namely the top level is learned within a second setting, and the other set of responses, the lower level, is learned in a street and home setting, and as long as these two settings are dissimilar, the two responses will remain specific to their own milieu.


Now, the setting of the Christian authority figure, especially the foreign missionary, is often quite different from the setting of home and street. Let us look once more into the concept of distance, not now as the consequence of split-level, but as an outstanding cause, for we seem to be concerned here with one of those deep vicious circles of a social institution. The distance between the authority figure and the home-and-street setting sets up two different stimuli-response systems, which create the split-level in the individual which in turn creates more social distance.


"Distance"
What is this "distance" which the priest after ordination or other christian authority  figure (nun, brother,minister, etc.) maintains from the milieu? First is the intellectual distance. The priest was brought up as an abstract, conceptual system of philosophy and theology which "jelled," reached its systemic form, in 13th century Europe. Undoubtedly, the system itself reached great depths of insight (e.g. Analogy of Being, God as Pure Act), but is large part had lost contact with the living stream of knowledge, especially the empirical sciences and modern arts.


Many seminarians learn their philosophy by rote. Only a few acquire real insight, and even these find difficulty in translating what they learned in Latin into everyday vocabulary. A sad sight to see is that of a priest subiendo mas alla, using the language and concepts he learned in the seminary and gaining blank stares from a captive congregation.


But even this intellectual gap could have been bridged if the priests had emotional ties with his congregation which would have permitted him to "take the role of the other." put himself in their place, and talk to them in the meaningful terms of their milieu. But the priest is either a foreigner,an outsider or a Filipino who was removed from his natural habitat at 11 or 12 and brought up in isolation from it. His emotional ties are for the most part restricted to his family. he lacks the emotional experiences to identify with non-relatives to successfully "take their role" within his imagination. he has to maintain emotional distance from them.


Perhaps it is this intellectual and emotional distance which is in part responsible for the phenomenon noted above (cf. the incident on the bus) of an ambivalent attitude towards the priest. There is simultaneously a deep reverence for him as well as a semiconscious or even unconscious rejection of him. The culture which the priest rejected in turn rejects him. From the culture's viewpoint, he is not "one of us," not a member of the "kami." 


Hence the attitude towards him is one of ambivalence, one must please and placate him and at the same time one must find someway to be oneself, to express one's real drives and needs. Hence one puts him at a distance so that one can lead one's life at a deeper level without too much interference.


HOMEOSTASIS
As in most cases of enduring social phenomena, there is a homeostatic balance in society which keeps split-level Christianity going, a sort of vicious circle of mutually reinforcing stimuli. In this case, the pushing away of the Christian authority figure tends to bring about the failure of Christianity to pervade the mass. On the other hand, the failure of Christianity to pervade the mass results in the pushing away of the Christian authority figures. The authority figures pushes the "sinful" mass (the "world') away from himself (Noli me Tangere). In turn the mass, being distant from the sanctifying influence of the authority figure, remains "sinful."


Undoubtedly, the term "sinful" must not be taken in its absolute, theological sense. perhaps "pagan" is a more fitting word. Perhaps it is more of the uncomfortable feeling such as that contained in the malicious, raucous laughter of the uncouth young men in a mob or in the eerie music of gongs coming from a Buddhist temple. But in any case, there is a gap between this pagan or sinful mutual pushing away of each other, a gap which reflects in the social area the split-level which is found in the individual.


Authorization Method of Instruction
Such is the distance producing mechanism within the society. This mechanism in turn sets up other self-reinforcing mechanisms, of which we shall look at only one;: the authoritarian method of instruction.


Since such a distance exists between  teacher and taught, since the teacher is brought up on a fopreign, abstract set of concepts, and since he lacks the experiential knowledge which could permit him to translate the concepts in terms of experienced reality, his only recourse is to have his students learn these concepts by rote. Furthermore, since the students have not experienced many of these concepts within their own culture, the concepts for them degenerate into mere words, to be memorized and given back to pleas the teacher. 

And since the teachers themselves, because of the distance-making mechanism, have not experienced the full realities of their students' culture, they are further hindered from translating the concepts they possess into terms which will be meaningful to the students. They can not hold dialogue. They can only impose authority.



Thus there appears the upper of the split-levels in the mind of the student, a level of concepts and words, interesting enough as bits of erudition but lacking the explosive power, the driving force of the "archetypes" of one's own culture. Thus it becomes possible to hold certain truths in the abstract, to look upon oneself as a Catholic rather than as an Aglipayan or an Iglesia ni Kristo and at the same time simultaneously be thinking and doing things objectively inconsistent with the abstract principles, and in the concrete behaving very much the same as the Aglipayan or Iglesias!


Hence, students can agree in class that bribery is wrong and after class pay the policeman a five-peso bill to be let-off a speeding charge (five pesos is the accepted fine for students, one or two pesos for jeepney drivers.) Girls can promise their sodality mistress never to wear jeans, but outside the school nonchalantly wear somewhat less than jeans. An objective listener, hearing such inconsistencies, might say that sometimes the abstract doctrine is wrong, sometimes the students are wrong, and sometimes the teachers are wrong


But in any case, there is an obvious lack of integrity. What is needed is some inner process of growth by which a man can reject principles which he really believes to be stupid or on the other hand subject his thinking and behavior to principles which eh really sees to be valid.


Summary: The Ego as Politician
Thus it can be seen that split-leveling is the way the Filipino learns to handle the opposing pressures of two distinct groups holding different values. He has to  please both groups. Like a politician in the provinces who has to entertain simultaneously a group of mestizos and a group of local farmers and solves his dilemma by placing the mestizos in the sala on the top floor and the farmers downstairs, so the Filipino pressured by two opposing value systems solves his dilemma by keeping them apart and by simply ignoring the inconsistencies.


His is an unconscious mechanism. The educational system itself conspires to keep the contradictions unconscious since the individual is rarely forced to think out his two systems, one in terms of the other. All he is asked to do is to give rote answers, to give what his teacher expects him to answer. At this task he is adept. Rarely is he placed in a situation such as in a class under a non-authoritarian teacher or in an ongoing discussion group where he is allowed to really be himself, so that in an atmosphere of intellectual freedom, supported by like-minded friends, he can reflect into his real feelings and reconcile them with his abstract principles.


One might as a social scientist end this paper her. But as a Christian, one may venture another question: what can be done about split-level Christianity? Can we indicate some broad lines leading to its solution? The fact that Filipinos hold on to both levels is indicative that there is some value in both. One cannot now act as the missionaries of old, who burned everything pagan as though it were from the devil.  Perhaps rather, by allowing more interplay between the two levels we can come up with something new, which will be fully Christian and fully Filipino at the same time.


This interplay might well take the form of a dialogue between the two groups represented by the levels. On the social level the Christian authority figure must be closer to his people. On the individual level, the Christian system of thought and behavior must be allowed to sink into and pervade the whole man. While it is admitted by all that some kind of religious education is needed to obtain this end, it also seems fairly obvious that something more than the old type of authoritarian, stereotyped instruction, is badly needed


Increasing the conceptual pressure merely increases the resistance in the hearer. Like the wind in the fable which tried tr remove the man's coat by blowing and succeeded only in making the man wrap his coat tighter around himself, so also the torrent of words, meaningless to the 20th century listener, the stronger the resistance to it and the wider the gap between the teacher and the student, between the Christian thought-and-behavior system and the thing called "life."


Pope Paul VI in his Encyclical, "Ecclesiam Suam," outlines a possible solution. Pope Paul says, "When the Church distinguishes itself from human nature, it does not oppose itself to it, but rather unites itself to it...The Church should enter into a dialogue with the world in which it exists and labors." Dialogue then is the keyword in the Christianization of Modern Man. By contrast to the Latinized, authoritarian, ethnocentric teaching of old, its characteristics according to Paul VI are: clearness, meekness, an attitude of welcoming the trust of the interlocutor, an esteem for the psychological and moral circumstances of the listener. 


The Pope describes how this dialogue is to be be carried on:
"And before speaking, it is necessary to listen, not only to a man's voice, but to his heart. A man must first be understood, and where he merits it, agreed with. In the very act of trying to make ourselves pastors, fathers and teachers of men, we must make ourselves their brothers,. The spirit of dialogue is friendship and, even more, service."
Here then is a possible line of action to close the gap between the Christian authority figure and the common mass, namely friendship, brotherhood and listening attitude.


Apostolate of Participation
To prepare the social context for such as dialogue, there may be much to be gained from a distinct form of the Apostolate whose specific aim is to bridge the distance between men of the Church and an unchristian world. The priest has to take the initiative. Relying on his common humanity, he has to work with men on the common task s of everyday temporal living, of developing the community's material and personnel resources on welfare organizations.

He has to sit on committees whose organizational structure is secular and built by seculars, and in which he has no power except what is given him by the democratic organization. he thus sits with his equals and participates in their life. He learns and he teaches, he gives and he takes. His apostolate may thus be called the Apostolate of participation, the participation of the clergy in the life of the laity.


Such an Apostolate of Participation will mean a willingness to give up much of the "power" which historical and cultural evolution after Constantine has vested in the churchman (Congar, 1964). The priest may have to shed certain symbols, such as the religious habit, which set him apart and give him a privileged status. In turn, he gains acceptance among men, as a member of mankind, not as a guest. 


As Paul VI says,
"The world can not be saved from the outside. As the Word of God became man, so must a man to a certain degree identify himself with the forms of life of those to whom he wishes to bring the message of Christ.  Without invoking privileges which would but widen the separation, without employing unintelligible terminology, he must share the common way of life --provided that it is human and honorable --especially of the most humble if he wishes to be listened to and understood." (Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam.)


Incarnation versus Split-Level
There must  first come about a change of attitude in those who are the culture's authority figures. They must reflect in their own lives the model of the first teacher.


Christ was incarnated, took flesh as a man among men. The priest must not be afraid to be a man among men. One must not thank God that he or she is not like the rest of men. In the Gospel the one who did so was the Pharisee. "Taking flesh" means being with one's own time and place, speaking its idiom, wearing its dress, weeping with it, and, by one's presence, sanctifying it.


References
Bulatao, J. "A Social-Psychological View of the Philippine Church," 1965. In The Encounter. Braganza,J. (Manila, Catholic Trade School, 1965)


Congar, Yves,O.P. "Power and poverty in the Church". (Trans. Jennifer Nicholas) Baltimore, Helicon, 1964.


Jocano,F.L. "Conversion and the Patterning of Christian Experience in Malitbog, Central Panay, Philippines" (Philippine Sociological Review, 1965, 13, 96-119).








"Beware of the yeast of Pharisees, that is, their hypocrisy. Nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed from the housetops." (Luke 12, NRSV)

**********************************


***********************************************************
PLEASE DONATE CORE SUBJECT BOOKS TO OUR HOMELAND (i.e. your hometown public schools, alma mater, etc.). Those books that you and/or your children do not need or want; or buy books from your local library during its cheap Book Sales. It is a small sacrifice. Also, cargo/door-to-door shipment is best. [clean up your closets or garage - donate books.THANKS!]
***********************************************************

I consider the following previous posts and the RECTO READER are essential about our homeland and us native, Malay Filipinos; and are therefore always presented in each new post. Click each to open/read.
  1. WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW:
  2. WHAT IS NATIONALISM [Filipino Nationalism]?
  3. Our Colonial Mentality and Its Roots 
  4. The Miseducation of the Filipino (Formation of our Americanized Mind)
  5. Jose Rizal - Reformist or Revolutionary?
  6. The Purpose of Our Past, Why Study (Our) History?
  7. Studying and Rethinking Our Philippine History
  8. Globalization (Neoliberalism) – The Road to Perdition in Our Homeland
  9. Resisting Globalization (WTO Agreements)
  10. Virtues of De-Globalization
  11. Our Filipino Kind of Religion
  12. Our Filipino Christianity and Our God-concept
  13. When Our Religion Becomes Evil
THE RECTO READER is presented in several postings. Click each to open/read:

NOTE: Recto's cited cases, examples or issues were of his time, of course; but realities in our homeland in the present and the foreseeable future are/expectedly much, much worse. Though I am tempted to update them with current issues, it's best to leave them as they are since Recto's paradigms about our much deepened national predicament still ring relevant, valid and true. In short, Recto saw the forest and never got lost in the trees.- Bert



  1. THE FILIPINO MIND blog contains 532 published postings you can view, as of December 12, 2012. 
  2. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of  ignorance, apathy, complacency and hopefully lead to active citizenship.
  3. All comments are welcomed for posting at the bottom window. Comments sent by email will also be posted verbatim. However, ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE IGNORED.
  4. Visit my other website, click --> SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind, or the SCRIB FEED at the sidebar, or type it on GOOGLE Search to read or download ebooks and PDFs of essays I have uploaded.  Statistics for my associated website:SCRIBD/theFilipinoMind : ALL FREE AND DOWNLOADABLE: 123 documents, 207,458 reads
  5. Some postings and other relevant events are now featured in Google+BMD_FacebookBMD_Twitter and BMD_Google Buzz and Google+.
  6. Translate to your own language. Go to the sidebar and Click on GOOGLE TRANSLATOR (56 languages - copy and paste sentences, paragraphs and whole articles, Google translates a whole posting in seconds, including to Filipino!!).
  7. Forwarding the posts to relatives and friends, ESPECIALLY in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. Use emails, Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. THANK YOU !!!
  8. Songs on Filipino nationalism: please reflect on the lyrics (messages) as well as the beautiful renditions. Other Filipino Music links at blog sidebar.  Click each to play.:






























Tuesday, November 11, 2008

The Ambivalence of Filipino Traits and Values



“Most people would rather die than think, in fact, they do so”. – Bertrand Russell

"Certain marks of colonization are still manifested by the people. I have arbitrarily identified these marks as dependence, subservience and compromise." (I add compromise of our homeland and at our peoples' expense) - Dr. Pura Santillan-Castrence


 *****************************************
Notes: Bold, colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posting/article. Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends,especially in the homeland, is greatly appreciated). To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr,Twitter,Facebook, etc. THANKS!!

****************************************




Hi All,

In my usual blog salutation "WHAT WE FILIPINOS SHOULD KNOW" I wrote:

....There is a need to look inward and realize some unpleasant truths about ourselves as Filipino individuals and as a society. It involves a "shaking of the foundations" or a "rocking of the boat" since it requires us to question our traditional beliefs and values, assumptions or notions. We need to seek an understanding of "why we are what we are, where we can or should be headed," and to therefore be able to formulate ways to attain where we can or should be.


Before everything, let us remind ourselves that we Filipinos have many and known good qualities, just like people of any other country. We all know this fact. However, let us not dwell on them since the objective here is not towards self-congratulation nor to hear/read what we want to.(see: http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2005/10/seeing-philippines-through-eyes-of.html)


The task here is to highlight our weaknesses so that these may in turn be corrected. I believe and think that only through a critical self-analysis or self-examination (ala preparatory to confession some of us learned in Catholic schools) can we change for the better. I am convinced that such an exercise will allow us to pursue truths however shocking and unpleasant they may be.


It is only when we have "come of age," when we have come to think for ourselves as an independent people with human dignity, with our own cultural heritage, national pride and sovereignty can we act and work in unity for our own truly, permanent liberation from the dehumanizing conditions imposed by our so-called leadership in government and business and their foreign partners.

If we are honestly concerned with our homeland beyond simply wishing for the better or fatalism, if we want fundamental changes to improve in the long-term the human conditions for the majority of our present and future countrymen in the homeland, it behooves us to do such a self-examination. 


We must look critically at what we are and why, examine the history and nature of our society which must be changed, then determine the direction of those changes. Finally, we must enlist the energies of that majority to effect such changes [facilitated by such knowledge and understanding.

In the past, I have posted several essays about our so-called Filipino values (click Fr. Vitaliano Gorospe SJ and Fr. Jaime Bulatao SJ in blog sidebar); and below article is a new find that presents some of our Filipino traits which seem to imply our Filipino outlook/world view on human existence or life, our Weltanschauung, to borrow a fancy term from Marx.

In the article, author
Prof. Emerita Quito shows us the two possibilities/functions of our so-called Filipino values, I add, in terms of individual or group/community/society/country benefit [for individually selfish benefit or the common good].

Thus, let us appreciate the fact that applied to our majority, i.e. our society, these values have the potential of working for our human upliftment/national betterment; or leading to our predicament (this latter which seems to dominate our society for so, so long).

I think and believe where we are and where we are going greatly depend on how much conscious awareness and understanding we have about our traits (as "dictated" by our beliefs and values) and how we act based on such knowledge. Obviously, education beyond "education for jobs" is imperative, i.e. liberal education that aids the development of critical thinking.

But as any thinking Filipino knows and realizes, education is no absolute guarantee of collective or social consciousness, which in turn can not guarantee acting for the common good. The Filipino has/is witness to so much insatiable, and systemic corruption by our educated fellowmen. However, education is a good start. At the end of the day, I think and believe that we are not born "tabula rasa." We are born with and shaped by nature (our genes/DNA, native IQ - can be improved on) and by our nurturing environment/milieu (our parents/guardians/role models, acquired knowledge from education and experiences).

Based on where we have become as supposedly and self-proclaimed Christian people, our highly influential Catholic Church and Catholic/Christian schoolings have failed, have not worked well in instilling an authentic Christian living, i.e emulating Christ for the common good in our homeland. Instead, these religious institutions tend to cater to the children of the rich and powerful; and inadvertently or not, led their followers to practicing "split-level" Christianity despite their proclamation of [and thus, paying lip-service to] "being for the poor."


Prof. Quito alluded to us Filipinos as being "other-wordly," which I think and believe is true. Our Filipino-type of Christianity has stressed one of the Beatitudes, i.e. "Blessed are the Poor..;" which is apparently taken literally by these priests, ministers and the masses; and thus play neatly into Marx's dictum " religion as the opium of the people."

While many of us Filipinos console ourselves with the thoughts of the afterlife of "heavenly reward" and thus not attending nor exerting time and effort to fixing our socio-economic and political predicaments, our so-called rulers in business, government and military with their foreign partners laugh at us on their way to their banks.

- Bert


“In the long-run every Government is the exact symbol of its People, with their WISDOM and UNWISDOM; we have to say, Like People like Government. “ - Thomas Carlyle, 1795-1881, Scottish Philosopher, Author


****************************************************


THE AMBIVALENCE OF FILIPINO TRAITS AND VALUES -
Prof. EMERITA S. QUITO


Much has been said about so-called negative Filipino traits. They have been blamed for the weak character of the Filipino; they are the culprits, the scapegoat of our failures, or at least, the explanation for lagging behind more successful Asian neighbors.

I propose to take a second look at these so-called negatives in the Filipino psyche to determine whether there might be a positive aspect, a saving face, a silver lining behind the dark clouds.In attempting to see an ambivalence in our traits,

I will use oriental yardsticks to measure success or failure for it would be unfair to use Western standards to evaluate our Filipino traits. For example, is a materially comfortable life with physiological ailments more successful than a materially deprived life without physical ailments? Is the image of Juan Tamad waiting for a guava to fall such a reprehensible, if not scandalous, picture? Is the similar image of Sir Isaac Newton, also resting under a tree, more refreshing?

It is very Filipino to stress our minus points, to find fault in our behavior, to compare us unfavorably with Westerners by using Western standards. It is common to hear such names as Bertong Bukol, or Ipeng Pilay or Huseng Ngongo.

It seems that we take pleasure in underscoring our weaknesses, faults, defects, etc. Our standards are smallness, averageness, mediocrity; grandeur or grandness is not in the Filipino vocabulary. The West, in contrast, evokes: Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Der Führer, Il Duce, El Caudillo, Elizabeth Regina. We seem to enjoy being humble and meek, or what Friedrich Nietzsche called "the morality of slaves."

There is something strange in the very way we look upon success. A person is not supposed to exert effort at the expense of sanity. We ridicule a person who teaches himself how to think and label him Tasio, the philosopher. We warn persons not to learn too much lest they be like Jose Rizal who was executed at the Luneta in 1896.

Assertiveness is frowned upon because it smacks of pride and ruthlessness. Success to the Filipino, must come naturally; it should not be induced or artificially contrived. One should not be successful at an early age because that would mean exertion and hard work. Success must come very late in life, if it is to come at all.

Filipino traits must be understood in the above context. Hence, they are considered negative only according to other yardsticks.

The following Filipino traits show an ambivalence of positive and negative aspects.


Hiya (shame)

Negative, because it arrests or inhibits one's action. This trait reduces one to smallness or to what Nietzsche calls the "morality of slaves", thus congealing the soul of the Filipino and emasculating him, making him timid, meek and weak.

Positive, because, it contributes to peace of mind and lack of stress by not even trying to achieve.


Ningas-cogon (procrastination)

Negative, by all standards, because it begins ardently and dies down as soon as it begins. This trait renders one inactive and unable to initiate things or to persevere.

Positive, in a way, because it makes a person non-chalant, detached, indifferent, nonplussed should anything go wrong, and hence conducive to peace and tranquillity.


Pakikisama (group loyalty)

Negative, because one closes one's eyes to evils like graft and corruption in order to conserve peace and harmony in a group at the expense of one's comfort.

Positive, because one lives for others; peace or lack of dissension is a constant goal.


Patigasan (test of strength)

Negative, because it is stubborn and resists all efforts at reconciliation. The trait makes us childish, vindictive, irresponsible, irrational. Actions resulting from this trait are leaving the phone off the hook to get even with one's party line; stopping the engine of the car to prove that one has the right of way; standing one's ground until the opposite party loses its patience.

Positive, because it is assign that we know our rights and are not easily cowed into submission. It is occidental in spirit, hence in keeping with Nietzsche's "will to power."


Bahala na (resignation)

Negative, because one leaves everything to chance under the pretext of trusting in Divine providence. This trait is really laziness disguised in religious garb.

Positive, because one relies on a superior power rather than on one's own. It is conducive to humility, modesty, and lack of arrogance.


Kasi (because, i. e., scapegoat)

Negative, because one disowns responsibility and makes a scapegoat out of someone or something. One is never to blame; one remains lily white and has a ready alibi for failure.

Positive, because one can see both sides of the picture and know exactly where a project failed. One will never suffer from guilt or self-recrimination.


Saving Face

Negative, because, being closely related to hiya and kasi, it enables a person to shirk responsibility. One is never accountable for anything.

Positive, because one's psyche is saved from undue embarrassment, sleepless nights, remorse of conscience. It saves one from accountability or responsibility. This trait enables one to make a graceful exit from guilt instead of facing the music and owning responsibility for an offense.


Sakop (inclusion)

Negative, because one never learns to be on one's own but relies on one's family and relatives. This trait stunts growth and prevents a person from growing on one's own. Generating a life of parasitism, this trait is very non-existential. Blaring music, loud tones are a result of this mentality. We wrongly think that all people like the music we play or the stories we tell. This mentality also makes us consider the world as one vast comfort room.

Positive, because one cares for the family and clan; one stands or falls with them. This trait makes a person show concern for the family to which he belongs.


Mañana or "Bukas na" (procrastination)

Negative, because one constantly postpones action and accomplishes nothing. This aggravates a situation, a problem grows beyond correction, a leak or a small break becomes a gaping hole. This arises from an indolent mentality that a problem will go away by itself.

Positive, because one is without stress and tension; one learns to take what comes naturally. Like the Chinese wu-wei, this trait makes one live naturally and without undue artificiality.


Utang na loob (indebtedness)

Negative, because one overlooks moral principles when one is indebted to a person. One who is beholden to another person will do anything to please him, thinking that by doing so he is able to repay a debt. One condones what the other person does and will never censure him for wrongdoing.

Positive, because it is a recognition of one's indebtedness. This trait portrays the spirit behind the Filipino saying, "He who does not know how to look to the past will never reach his destination."


Kanya-kanya (self-centeredness)

Negative, because self-centered; one has no regard for others. So long as my family and I are not in need, I do not care about he world.

Positive, because one takes care of oneself and one's family: "Blood is thicker than water."
At the end of our exposé of the positive and negative aspects of the Filipino psyche, one asks the question: What after all, is its ideal of personality, activity and achievement?

Regarding personality, if the ideal is a personality without stress and tension, then Filipino traits contribute to this. The contention is that success necessarily means hypertension, ulcers and sleepless nights. Could there exist a state of success without these physical aberrations?
Regarding activity, if the idea is that one should engage in a whirlpool of activity or if the work ethic is workaholism, then the Filipino indeed is in very poor estate. But is this not more of the Occidental or Western concept of activity? In contrast, the Oriental emphasizes conformity with nature; hence, one should never exaggerate or overact.

Regarding achievement, if the ideal is that one must achieve an earthly goal, then the Filipino, as a race, will occupy a low rank. But again, is this ideal not more Occidental or Western, according to which one must always set a goal and accomplish it?


Setting a goal is not wrong in any culture, but the manner of achieving it which can be questionable. Does one have to expend one's total energy in the pursuit of an ideal which, after all, is a personal, earthly goal?

If for the Filipino smallness, meekness, and humility are ideals, could it not be that he is not this-worldly?

Could he not perhaps be aiming, consciously or otherwise, at the life in the hereafter where the last will be the first, the weak will be strong, and the small will be great?


De La Salle University, Manila


“EDUCATION is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.” - Edward Everett, 1794-1865, American Statesman, Scholar

“The aim of EDUCATION should be to teach us rather how to think, than what to think -- rather to improve our minds, so as to enable us to think for ourselves, than to load the memory with the thoughts of other men.” - John Dewey, 1859-1952, American Philosopher, Educator





***********************************************************
PLEASE DONATE CORE/FUNDAMENTAL SUBJECT BOOKS TO OUR HOMELAND (i.e. your hometown public schools, Alma Mater, etc.). Those books that you and/or your children do not need or want; or buy books from your local library during its cheap Book Sales. Also, cargo/door-to-door shipment is best.  It is a small sacrifice.  [clean up your closets or garage - donate books.THANKS!]
***********************************************************

Hi All,

The below link will show a short list of my past posts (out of 540 posts so far) which I consider as basic topics about us native (indio)/ Malay Filipinos. This link/listing, which may later expand, will always be presented at the bottom of each future post.  Just point-and-click at each listed item to open and read. 


Thank you for reading and sharing with others, especially those in our homeland.

- Bert

PLEASE POINT & CLICK THIS LINK:  
http://www.thefilipinomind.com/2013/08/primary-postsreadings-for-my-fellow.html




**********************************************


  1. THE FILIPINO MIND blog contains 532 published postings you can view, as of December 12, 2012. 
  2. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of  ignorance, apathy, complacency and hopefully lead to active citizenship.
  3. All comments are welcomed for posting at the bottom window. Comments sent by email will also be posted verbatim. However, ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE IGNORED.
  4. Visit my other website, click --> SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind, or the SCRIB FEED at the sidebar, or type it on GOOGLE Search to read or download ebooks and PDFs of essays I have uploaded.  Statistics for my associated website:SCRIBD/theFilipinoMind : ALL FREE AND DOWNLOADABLE: 123 documents, 207,458 reads
  5. Some postings and other relevant events are now featured in Google+BMD_FacebookBMD_Twitter and BMD_Google Buzz and Google+.
  6. Translate to your own language. Go to the sidebar and Click on GOOGLE TRANSLATOR (56 languages - copy and paste sentences, paragraphs and whole articles, Google translates a whole posting in seconds, including to Filipino!!).
  7. Forwarding the posts to relatives and friends, ESPECIALLY in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. Use emails, Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. THANK YOU !!!
  8. Songs on Filipino nationalism: please reflect on the lyrics (messages) as well as the beautiful renditions. Other Filipino Music links at blog sidebar.  Click each to play.: