Filipino Philosophy or A Filipino's Philosophy: Clarificatory Notes

By Dr. Noel S. Pariñas

Yes, the title is an exclusive disjunction, but it can be reformulated as a conjunctive statement as well. Obviously, the first disjunct is different from the second disjunct. Since the disjunctive statement is not tautological, the alternatives cannot replace each other. When the disjuncts are used synonymously and interchangeably, a philosophical problem would necessarily arise. Such a philosophical problem will give birth to debates and conflicting views without a definite path towards the possibility of resolution except when the context is made clear.

There are philosophies in the Philippines; there are Filipinos doing philosophy; there are Filipino philosophers; there are Filipino philosophical writings; and every Filipino embraces an existentially personal philosophy. All these things mentioned are not materially equivalent to Filipino philosophy. Neither the above-mentioned can be logical grounds to justify the existence of the so-called Filipino philosophy. Wittenstein has already noted wittingly in his Philosophical Investigations that philosophical problems arise because of confusion due to language misuse when language-games are mixed-up. As framed with exactness to remind philosophers or even non-philosophers, “philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday“ (1). 

First note. There are philosophies in the Philippines. Let me identify a few. The sectarians from the left subscribe to Marxist-Leninist-Maoist philosophy. The Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology is the philosophy behind every struggle against capitalism in favor of equalization of the social and economic forces by the state. Feminism is also another philosophy that criticizes the dominance of patriarchal ideology and offers an alternative framework to replace the hegemony of male-dominated spaces. As a dominantly Christian country, essentialism is also evident among the believers whose theocentrism is anchored on the fundamental principle that ‘essence precedes existence’. All these philosophies [among others] exist in the Philippines, but it is logically fallacious to infer that Marxism, Feminism, or Essentialism is Filipino philosophy or vice versa.

Second note. There were many Filipino philosophy scholars, famous Filipinos who were doing philosophy, or prolific Filipino philosophers who made significant and influential contributions to the body of wisdom. Jose Maria Sison, Ranhilio Aquino, and Roque Ferriols [among others] have demonstrated in their unique way how philosophy is done and lived. What is common among them, which they cannot deny, is the trace of occidentalism [inverted orientalism] and orientalism in their approaches - Western reading of the East and Eastern reading of the West. What they did was not really the creation of Filipino philosophy but a demonstration of how philosophy as a method and system of thought is contextualized and appropriated in the Philippines whether in legal, political, social, and ethical discourses. When a thinker theorizes on an existing theory, he is precisely doing philosophy. Philosophy is a metatheory - a theory of theory.

Third note. There are Filipino philosophical texts. In Mabaquiao’s Isang Paglilinaw sa Kahulugan at Kairanlan ng Pilosopiyang Filipino (2),  he attempted to justify the existence of Filipino philosophy using [formal system of] logic. In the process, however, he confuses between Filipino philosophy and Filipino philosophical text. He has successfully proven the existence of a text that is both Filipino and philosophical. Out of such a premise, he inferred that Filipino philosophy exists as a material equivalence. This logical leap of treating the two concepts as synonymous and using them interchangeably is language misuse or mixing-up language games that eventually resulted in a philosophical problem. Jose Rizal, Apolinario Mabini, and Jose Laurel [among others] wrote texts that are philosophical which are based on Filipino experiences and consciousness. Through their writings, they have scholarly documented their philosophies. Hence, Rizal’s philosophy, Mabini’s philosophy, and Laurel’s philosophy exist. Their philosophies are philosophies in the Philippines, but Rizal’s philosophy is only a Filipino’s philosophy and not Filipino philosophy. Besides, not all Filipinos subscribe to the philosophy of Rizal. 

Fourth and final note. Each Filipino has his own philosophy. We recognize the existence of Euclid’s mathematics, Newton’s mathematics, and Einstein's mathematics as we recognize the laudable works of Mercado, Timbreza, or Maboloc [among others] that might even disagree with each other. What philosophy scholars are inclined to say about the objectivity and reality of philosophical fact [e.g. loob] is not Filipino philosophy, but something for philosophical treatment (3) as they are ‘basal concepts’ and ‘root metaphors’ embedded in Filipino language.

Philosophy is a personal quest for the meaning of one’s existence that transcends national colors. As convincingly noted by Ranhilio Aquino, “when one asks the questions – what is a good life? or what is there to live for? – these seem to be interrogative sentences that make the introduction of citizenship or nationality an unpardonable impertinence because these questions are the very questions that define our humanity.” (4) Hence, the title should then be construed carefully and thoughtfully. It is my logical contention that while the second disjunct exists, the first does not.

______________________

Notes:

Source: Noel Pariñas, “Filipino Philosophy?” in Academia Letters, Article 442, May 2021, pp. 1-7; Noel Pariñas, “Filipino Philosophy?” in Synkretic: The Indo-Pacific Origin of Philosophy, No. 1. Brisbane: Irukandji Press, February 2022, pp. 127-130. 

Author: Noel S. Pariñas is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of the Philippines. He holds PhB and MAPh from Saint Louis University, PhD from Benguet State University, and JD from the University of Baguio. He sojourns in Baguio City, Philippines.

1 Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 4th Ed., Anscombe and Hacker (Trans.), (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2009), par. 39, p. 23.

2 Napoleon Mabaquiao, A Clarification in the Existence and Meaning of Filipino Philosophy, (Manila: De La Salle University, 2012).

3 Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 4th Ed., Anscombe and Hacker (Trans.), (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2009), par. 254, p. 98.

4 “No one will seriously advocate the view that there is such a thing as British physics, or German mathematics or Greek geometry. These disciplines apparently do not wear national colors and it is even absurd to suggest that they do. It is in the nature of science in fact to be no respecter of national boundaries or of political divisions. Should that be less true of philosophy?” Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, ‘Filipino Philosophy?’, in The Manila Times, 19 June 2019, available at: <https://bit.ly/3pu9VB7>.