Philosophy Today

            “Obsolete” as how one person of rank said about philosophy. It was even inside a general assembly and I think that was a very bold statement from one who has no Ph.D, but an Ed.D. If I remembered it well, me, Regletto and Balotol were there, just listening. Since it was public, so many did follow that statement and use that to tease us even inside the office. Sad to say, they have ambitions to have a Ph.D or and Ed. D as well. Sometimes you wish to just explain to them, but I guess reason cannot be effective to those who do not have any. Or shall I say, the only thing they have learned in their philosophy classes is only to incant terms with “isms” so as to sound smart and conjure authority.

            When I was yet in college people tend to ask me what degree am I taking and as I say to them philosophy they begin to nod in impression to hear a term that for them seemed difficult but a crucial follow up question, “what will be your job?” Maybe yes that is one good question especially it is basic acquire a decent salary but if one’s mindset is simply mechanical then philosophy here in our current situation offers no great monetary boon but if I say to them for the sake of knowledge and a change of perspectives, they will laugh. I guess the instrumental kind of thinking is already embedded in the mindset of everybody brought about a capitalistic trend.

            Now as a teacher, if philosophy is all about memorizing names and terminologies well the students love that easy kind of test, but if you are going to let them think like the philosopher or letting them step into the philosophers shoes, majority will hate you for being a terror even though their notes are open in oral exams or even written. But in my journey, some did appreciate especially those who have the same mindset as ours, especially those who are already thirsty for knowledge and as a result they wish to talk more in wonder and wonder.

            I have heard students who push their opinions but I only entertain opinions if they can follow through the philosopher’s thinking of which they are having difficulty. Their opinions as well do not have basis and one student in frustration said that philosophy is about sharing your opinions. Judging from that statement, some students take it as a free for all brawl of thought. Although I agree that we have to air out our opinions, but only after we have understood first (even a certain extent). They are like criticizing without knowing what they are criticizing. Plus they attack the box not from within but with the use of another box.

            Been given with other subjects to teach such as Philippine History, Humanities, Psychology and Rizal is more like a challenge, but as having been enmeshed with Philosophy, I have my bias in incorporating philosophy in all of these subjects, moreso the rigor of philosophy is translated into these disciplines. Yet for institutions who does not value your personal undertaking of the subjects especially you studied beyond what is written in the given syllabus and altering some to give a more in depth understanding of the subjects, they will surely ridicule you and label you a subversive.

            The language of philosophy is so rigorous but if we wish to make it known to the others, then it is also one major task of a teacher to tone down the language to make it friendly but the dilemma is being tied to errors and the insufficiency and the loss of meaning in simplification and in the other side, the students will be the Filipino youth of today who suddenly undergoes a Tridentine mass. There is the need to be understood, because what is the point if philosophy is only good for the few. We even have the feel of being educated and if our being educated is only limited to talking and not shaping others then the more demise of us being futile and irrelevant. At least we have a touch of reality especially the social realm.

            To quote a few people who saw the problem and the need for the thinkers to  have a social relevance, one from Herbert Marcuse and the other is from Karl Marx.

"The educated classes isolated themselves from the practical affairs and, thus rendering themselves impotent to apply their reason to the reshaping of society, fulfilled themselves in a realm of science, art, philosophy and religion. That realm became for them the 'true reality' transcending the wretchedness of existing social conditions; it was alike the refuge for truth, goodness, beauty, happiness, and, most important, for a critical temper which could not be turned into social channels." (H. Marcuse, Reason and Revolution)

“Philosophers have interpreted the world in various ways, the point, however, is to change it.” (Karl Marx)

            As much as what I have said about my experience of philosophy, being a student and a teacher. There is always the struggle of philosophy being recognized as something that is really existent not just a handmaiden to theology. Inside our capitalistic set-up, it is difficult not to sell ourselves because we need to have a certain point to do so especially those who are not well-off and lavishing over the already accumulated richness from their families. No wonder, I could say that most who take up philosophy are those who are well off already, to those who do not need any mechanical technological course to feed first their hungry family. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were noblemen in Greece. But my point is not to say that philosophy is an elitist pastime, but we can just understand why it is not loved by most because they are too hungry to think nor too economically troubled to speculate and I as a teacher ended up in one dilemma wherein students are apt for memorizations not thinking. Compared to a elite audience who can have the time to leisurely think. But one can say also of those who are already well-off yet do not participate in the leisure of thinking, because they are stuck inside a drive to consume and consume.

            Philosophy today in other countries is well respected and it is one the pride of the academic institution because that is one very academic subject. But here in the local, there are a lot of people who had their doctorate degrees, but I doubt whether their nature of being a doctors of philosophy makes sense. Or maybe they earn that degree easily or I say that the educational system that dispenses these degrees is questionable, shall we say, a diploma mill and the essence of philosophy is not embedded to them. Shall we are trapped in a very backward world whose philosophy was not even developed. Great civilizations so too have their signature philosophical outputs, a Volks-Geisteswissenchaften. Our greatness has yet to come, but in the local sphere, it is yet a dream while it is comforting for me to see USC and its philosophy department so as this HOME library gatherings. Hoping that we will not be pushed back into an underground society, if so, we will be forced to be violent.

            Philosophy is relevant yet the others have to see that. For us who knew, well this is one monumental task of changing the society. “In fashioning ourselves, we fashion man.” (Sartre) Hoping that we do fashion not ourselves and the “man” within, but men in general.