In defense of Filipino values and norms:  Debunking the ambivalence theory

Benitez Luzano Jiolito

doi:10.46223/HCMCOUJS.soci.en.12.1.2215.2022

Abstract

No nation has been so scorned for her values and norms by her own people, including the most educated of them, as the Philippines. This study critically peruses the ambivalence theory of Filipino values and norms to debunk its central claim that Filipino values and norms are ambivalent due to their inherent potential to be good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, strength and weakness. Using as frameworks of analysis the sociological and psychological postulates of ambivalence as well as the Aristotelian notion of virtue, the perusal yields five paramount findings that sum up the errors of this theory. First, the problematic and dichotomic approach to Filipino values and norms as good and bad, right and wrong, weakness and strength, virtue and vice to warrant the forgone conclusion of ambivalence. Second, the epic confusion in which the transgressive attitudes, traits, and behaviors are deemed part of the defining features of Filipino values and norms. Third, Filipino values are blamed for or used to justify the negative attitudes, weak character traits, and misdeeds of Filipinos. Fourth, the proponents' negative and inconsistent interpretations of Filipino values and norms. Fifth, the sociological and psychological postulates of ambivalence and the Aristotelean concept of virtue do not support the claim of ambivalence. On the strengths of the findings, the ambivalence theory is effectively debunked. With the putative post-ambivalence period, comes the challenge to disabuse the minds of those who have credulously professed the ambivalence creed.

Keywords

ambivalence; character traits; Filipino values; norms; virtue

Full Text:

PDF

Cite this paper as:

Jiolito, B. L. (2022). In defense of Filipino values and norms: Debunking the ambivalence theory. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science – Social Sciences, 12(1), 130-143. doi:10.46223/HCMCOUJS.soci.en.12.1.2215.2022

References

Aguas, J. J. S. (2016). The Filipino value of pakikipagpagkapwa-tao vis-à-vis Gabriel Marcel’s notion of creative fidelity and disponibilite. Scientia: The Research Journal of the College of Arts and Sciences, 5, 17-39.

Andres, T. Q. D. (1981). Understanding Filipino values. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publishers.

Aurell, M. (2017). The lettered knight: Knowledge and aristocratic behaviour in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. New York, NY: Central European University Press.

Barakat, Z. M. (2017). From heart of stone to heart of flesh: Evolutionary journey from extremism to moderation (Vol. 17). Bavaria, Germany: Herbert Utz Verlag.

Benitez J. (2022a). An Inquiry into the Problems Concerning Filipino Values and Norms. Recoletos Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 10(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.32871/rmrj2210.01.03

Benitez, J. (2022b). Who Are We to Judge?’: Pathologies of Moral Judgement. CONNEXION Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 11(1), Article ID: 258088. Retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/MFUconnexion/article/view/258088

Benitez, J. L. (2020). Filipino values and moral norms: An inquiry into the problems concerning their validity and efficacy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Silliman University, Dumaguete City, Philippines.

Benitez, J. L. (2015). The mendicants’ rap poetry: Critique from the margins. CNU- Journal of Higher Education, 9, 231-240.

Berman, N. (2012). Passion and ambivalence: Colonialism, nationalism, and international law. Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Blazina, C., & Shen-Miller, D. S. (Eds.). (2011). An international psychology of men: Theoretical advances, case studies, and clinical innovations (Vol. 7). New York, NY: Routledge.

Bulatao, J. (1964). Hiya. Philippine Studies, 12(3), 424-438.

Bulatao, J. C. (1992). Phenomena and their interpretation: Landmark essays, 1957-1989. Manila, Philippines: Ateneo University Press.

Bulloch, H. C. (2017). Ambivalent moralities of cooperation and corruption: Local explanations for (under) development on a Philippine island. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 28(1), 56-71. doi:10.1111/taja.12173

Cleofas, J. A. (2019). Towards a practical and empirically grounded account of útang-na- loób as a Filipino virtue. Retrieved February 08, 2022, from https://archium.ateneo.edu/ cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=philofaculty-pubs

Crisp, R. (Ed.). (2014). Aristotle: Nicomachean ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

de Castro, L. (1995). Ang utang na loob bilang konsepto ng etika. Quezon City, Philippines: CSSP Publications.

de Castro, L. (1999). Kagandahang loob: Love in Philippine bioethics. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, 9(2), 39-40.

de Guia, K. (2005). Kapwa: The self in the other. Pasig City, Philippines: Anvil Publishing.

de Mesa, J. (1979) And God said, “Bahala na!”: The theme of providence in the lowland Filipino context. Quezon City, Philippines: Maryhill School of Theology.

de Mesa, J. (1986). Loob and prayer. Ministry Today, 2(1), 42-50.

Dy, M. B. (Ed.). (1994). Values in Philippine culture and education (Vol. 1). Washington, D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.

Enriquez, V. G. (1978). Kapwa: A core concept in Filipino social psychology. Philippine Social Sciences and Humanities Review, 42(1/4), 100-108.

Enriquez, V. G. (1980). Philippine world views: The Filipino weltanschauung in languages, literature, popular culture, visual arts, and other fields. Manila, Philippines: Philippine Psychology Research House.

Enriquez, V. G. (1992). From colonial to liberation psychology. Quezon City, Philippines: The University of the Philippines.

Gorospe, V. R. (1994). Understanding the Filipino values system. In M. B. Dy (Ed.), Values in philippine culture and education (pp. 63-68). Washington, D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.

Griffiths, C. (2021). The ambivalence of gay liberation: Male homosexual politics in 1970s West Germany. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hillcoat-Nallétamby, S., & Phillips, J. E. (2011). Sociological ambivalence revisited. Sociology, 45(2), 202-217. doi:10.1177/0038038510394018

Holnsteiner, M. (1973). Reciprocity in the lowland Philippines. In F. Lynch & A. de Guzman (Eds.), Four readings on Philippine values (pp. 69-92). Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila.

Hong, Y. (2019). A theological understanding of power for poverty alleviation in the Philippines with special reference to US-based Filipino protestants in Texas. Retrieved January 25, 2022, from AsburyTheological Seminary website: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2360&context=ecommonsatsdissertations

Jocano, F. L. (1998a). Filipino prehistory: Rediscovering precolonial heritage. Quezon City, Philippines: Punlad Research House.

Jocano, F. L. (1998b). Filipino social organization: Traditional kinship and family organization. Quezon City, Philippines: Punlad Research House.

Jocano, F. L. (1997). Filipino value system: A cultural definition. Quezon City, Philippines: Punlad Research House.

Kaut, C. (1961). Utang na loob: A system of contractual obligation among Tagalogs. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 17(3), 256-272. doi:10.1086/soutjanth.17.3.3629045

Lasquety-Reyes, J. (2016). In defense of hiya as a Filipino virtue. Asian Philosophy, 26(1), 66-78. doi:10.1080/09552367.2015.1136203

Licuanan, P. B. (1994). A moral recovery program: Building a people-building a nation. In M. B. Dy (Ed.), Values in Philippine culture and education (pp. 35-54). Washingtont, D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.

Lynch, F., & de Guzman, A. I. (Eds.). (1973). Four readings on Philippine values (4th ed.). Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila.

Macaranas, B. P. (2018). A philosophical review of Filipino values: Ambivalent values. Retrieved September 30, 2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Juan-Macaranas/publication/349991771_A_PHILOSOPHICAL_REVIEW_OF_FILIPINO_VALUES_AMBIVALENT_VALUES/links/604a59d3a6fdcc4d3e57ef9d/A-PHILOSOPHICAL-REVIEW-OF-FILIPINO-VALUES-AMBIVALENT-VALUES.pdf

Maio, G. R., Haddock, G., & Verplanken, B. (2019). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.

Mercado, L. (1976). Elements of Filipino philosophy. Tacloban City, Philippines: Divine Word.

Mercado, L. (1979) Elements of Filipino ethics. Tacloban City, Philippines: Divine Word.

Mercado, L. (1994). The Filipino mind. Retrieved September 30, 2020, from The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy website: https://www.crvp.org/publications/Series-III/III-8.pdf

Merriam-Webster. (2021). Ambivalence. Retrieved February 08, 2022, from www.merriam-webster.com

Merton, R. K. (1976). Sociological ambivalence and other essays. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Meyer, S. S. (2008). Ancient ethics. New York, NY: Routledge.

Miranda, D. (1989). Loob: The Filipino within. Manila, Philippines: Divine Word Publications.

Miranda, D. (1992). Buting Pinoy: Probe essays on value as Filipino. Manila, Philippines: Divine Word Publications.

Miranda, D. (2003). Kaloob ni Kristo: A Filipino Christian account of conscience. Manila, Philippines: Logos Publications.

Pilsner, J. (2006). The specification of human actions in St Thomas Aquinas. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Quito, E. (1994). The ambivalence of Filipino traits and values. In M. B. Dy (Ed.), Values in Philippine culture and education (pp. 57-61). Washington, D.C.: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.

Reyes, J. (2015). Loób and kapwa: An introduction to a Filipino virtue ethics. Asian Philosophy, 25(2), 148-171. doi:10.1080/09552367.2015.1043173

Roces, M. (1991). Cultural conflict as a framework for interpreting Philippine postwar history. Asian Studies Review, 15(2), 94-102. doi:10.1080/03147539108712782

Tablan, F. (2021). Filipino virtue ethics and meaningful work. Humanities Bulletin, 4(1), 20-40.

Tan, A. L. (1997). Values research in the Philippines. Philippine Studies, 45(4), 560-569.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46223/HCMCOUJS.soci.en.12.1.2215.2022

12 (1) 2022

In defense of Filipino values and norms: Debunking the ambivalence theory

Abstract

Keywords

Full Text:

Cite this paper as:

References