Some useless thoughts on Traditional Method for the search for Filipino Philosophy

Think of what they think by thinking the way they think at the level of their capacity to think...What do you think?

Is it okay to use the traditional approach to the study of philosophy that is based on “the standard used by historians.” So, to speak of Greek Philosophy, we enumerate Greek Philosopher and their works. So to study Greek Philosophy, we study Greek Philosophers and so with the other philosophies like German, English, American, etc.

Basically, we search for the thinkers in the likes of Plato, Aristotle up to the modern philosophers like Descartes, Kant  etc. But here I am curios as to what archetypes that must be used to establish who should be the Filipino Philosophers and who would define Filipino Philosophy. I mean, Rizal and the other Filipino thinkers during the Spanish era were not really espousing any "authentic Filipino philosophy" they were just applying or contextualizing political philosophies from Europe. So, the effort to make Rizal a sort of representative Filipino philosopher is not hmmmm...feasible. I am not saying Rizal is a not a philosopher in his own rights (I am not a professional philosopher, I am just hmmm..what do you call...this...a teacher who likes to read some head-ache inducing stuff).

Western philosophers from the Greeks till Hegel were system builders. That is, their philosophies are all encompassing ideas and thoughts from metaphysics, to epistemology, ethics, aesthetics etc. That is why many of these system builders’ thoughts and ideas are not confined by subject, geography and time, but rather they permeate in all areas of thinking and thoughts from the past and, maybe, way beyond the future.

An example of the influences and this transcending quality of systematic philosophy by a particular philosopher is A. N. White head’s statement that all western philosophies are footnotes to Plato to which he means that Plato laid the very foundation from which all western philosophies sprung.

 The modern age of philosophy began with Descartes’ reflections and it lead to the thought that the body is different from the mind, that is Descartes’ Cartesian dualism, to which many thinkers and even common people subscribe so the impact of his thoughts is still felt. If you think that you ought to do good because it is the right thing to do and that is your duty, you are a Kantian. (As opposed to the theists’ ethics of rewards and punishment.) Kant’s thought permeates everything from mathematics, to psychology to education and he is considered as the one of the greatest among the greatest. These are all systems of philosophy that are rich in ideas that even parts may become irrelevant with time yet with re-interpretation and relevant researches (maybe) will experience re-birth in the future.  

These are some types western philosophers and even the minor philosophers have more or less built systems or have espoused systematic philosophies that show great intellectual creativity as well deep and broad education and influences from the Greek.

Another thing about Western Philosophy is that it is connected and progressive.  Its development is a continuing articulation, emendation and refutation of previous philosophies while some experience death and then re-births and rediscovery well into our era and maybe even intro the future. So, it’s continuing synthesis. No philosopher is isolated from another.

The oriental (or Asians) thinkers are different from the western philosophers. The fact that they are referred to as sages rather than philosophers is a clear indication of the difference between east and west's idea of philosophy.

Asian philosophers are not system builders in the likes of Plato, Kant or Hegel. Their philosophies are more concerned with relationships and ethics, sort of an organic philosophy that is more concerned with life, civics and relationships. Confucius’s philosophy is concerned with   education, achieving good and meaningful life, and how people should behave in a society. His is a social, political and educational philosophy. His writings are adages and maxims; ethical writings that illustrates and points out rather than treatises and rhetorical tautologies that analyzes and argues and theorizes on metaphysical blah, blah, blah. Buddha’s concern is illumination of the self. Lao-Tzu is concerned with harmony and balance of nature/s.Their writings do not exhibit the systematic analyses and exemplifications of western philosophers, theirs are more or less generalizations based on experiences with a little touch of  poetry, mysticism, and a little bit of non-sense.

Another thing is that Asian philosophers are intertwined with religion in that these sages are either deified or sanctified by their followers which is not the case for the western philosophers. Though Asian philosophers are not really concerned with the idea of the deity except maybe a pantheistic conception of the ultimate something. (Buddhism is in reality an atheist religion), yet the idea of achieving balance, harmony and even annihilation (or Nirvana) permeated their thought to the point that the philosophy evolve into theology. I was talking about this with a co-teacher and I told him that we Christians seek eternal life while our Asian brothers seek annihilation, the total destruction of the individuality of a person which shows basic difference of perspective about (the basis of) reality. Many Asian sages or philosophers were deified because of the way they lived and exemplified their philosophies theres Buddha, Lao Tzu, Confucius and Jesus. This is unimaginable with western philosophers take for example the great french romantic philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau who lived his life  quite off the mark of his romantic philosophy. Anyway...

Another thought is that Asian philosophies are interconnected by race, by education and by communication through trading. Hence, it can be said that Filipino philosophy may be a sub-philosophy of a more general Asian philosophy. The dominant philosophy in Asia are the Chinese and Indian philosophy. And in our search for our own Filipino sub-Asian-philosophy it may well be more productive to look for the relationship we have with our Asian brothers specifically the Chinese, Indian and Japanese civilizations have influenced in the development of our identity and culture more than the Spanish and the Americans, i.e. if we consider the fact that we have civilization/s and international relations with our neighbors before the Spanish came.

My point:  connect with Asian philosophy rather than with western philosophy, it's a good place to explore.