2. Filipino Philosophy can be divided into three
approaches with 16 meanings. According to
Gripaldo (2014), the following approaches can be
observed: the traditional/ philosophical
approach, the cultural approach, and the
nationality / constitutional approach.
3. The traditional approach is based on the Greek
model, wherein individual Filipino philosophers’
ideas are discussed.
4. The traditional approach to Filipino philosophy is
rooted in the Latin word tradere, which means to
hand over, like handing over the customs and
beliefs from one generation to another. In this
case, the traditional approach is the philosophical
tradition that is being handed down to us today.
5. This approach is a genuine type of philosophizing.
This tradition goes as far back as the Ancient
Greeks, and Chinese, up to the contemporary
period (our present time), with an individual
philosopher presenting his or her own philosophy
to others for appreciation and critiquing, to be
defended and modified.
6. Hence, the first Filipino philosophers were our
eminent Filipino reformists and revolutionists.
Among them were Jose Rizal, Andress Bonifacio,
Emilio Jacinto, Graciano Lopez Jaena, Marcel H.
del Pilar.The European enlightenment of the 18th
century second half of the 19th century by way of
the young Filipinos, like Rizal, who studied in
Spain and other parts of Europe
8. The only reference needed is the nationality of the
author or the writer. Filipino nationality is
determined in accordance with the Philippine
constitution.The nationality of the author comes
to the forefront since the author makes the
interpretative exposition and analysis of
philosophical texts in the Philippines context.
9. He noted a good number of Filipino philosophers,
but most of them write on Eastern andWestern
philosophies.They sometimes forget to write
about their own Filipino philosophy. He estimated
about 80 percent of Filipino philosophical writings
onWestern and Eastern philosophies.
10. In other words, any Filipino philosophical work,
regardless of the subject matter, is part of Filipino
philosophy, by virtue of the author’s nationality.
Thus, in his bibliographies on the Filipino
philosophy, he included of the completion various
entries that others might not agree with.
11. The Cultural approach, on the other hand,
addresses the people’s philosophical perspectives
and views on socio-linguistic, cultural and folk
concepts.
12. The cultural approach to Filipino philosophy is
part of contemporary philosophy, the philosophy
of culture. It is an attempt to view the
philosophical perspective of a community or a
group of people, or even of a nation, from its
folkways, folk wisdom, and such like. It is usually
done hand in hand with anthropology, sociology,
literary studies, psychology, and other human
sciences.
13. It is also called a descriptive approach in the sense
that scholars of this field interpretatively describe
the philosophical perspectives of tribes or nations
in terms of their languages and dialects,
folksongs, folk literature, riddles, and the like.
14. While the traditional approach identifies Filipino
philosophers in the realm of the philosophical
tradition, such as Greek philosophy, the national
approach classifies philosophers and their
writings by virtue of their nationality,The cultural
approach tries to understand, in a holistic fashion,
the Filipino mind in terms of philosophical
presuppositions, assumptions, or implications of
native Filipino languages.This included literature,
mythology, epithets (basag), sayings, and the like.
15. Philippine indigenous philosophy and worldviews
are classified under the cultural approach;
accordingly, they can be divided into the following
categories:
16. •Filipino grassroots or folk philosophies
•Folk philosophy appropriation
•Interpretation of Filipino identity and worldview
•Local cultural values and ethics research; and
•Implications and presuppositions of Filipino
worldviews.
17. Timbreza (2004), in his book Pilisopiyang Pilipino,
discusses the issue of whether Filipino philosophy
exists or not. Since philosophy starts and ends
with people’s experience, it follows that there is
Filipino philosophy, considering that the Filipino
experience exists.Timbreza used the cultural
approach as classified by Grapaldo, as he analyzes
unique life experiences to harness these
worldviews.
18. Furthermore, if these worldviews are based on
literature, art, ethics, practice, and attitudes,
Filipinos can be said to have their own
weltanschauung. (worldviews). Consequently,
Timbreza uses indigenous and native legends,
poems, epics, songs, riddles (bugtog), proverbs (
salawikain), rituals, and dances as the basis for the
collective Filipino philosophy of life.
19. He attributes the general Filipino worldview to the
experiences of these honorable groups – ivatan,
ollokano, tagalog, Pampanggo, Pangasinensi,
Ibanag, Igorot, Bicolano, Cebuano, Boholano,
Bisaya,Tiruray,Tausug, Maranao, Maguindanao,
Aklano, Bukidnon, Sugnuanon, Zambaleno,
Romblomanon, Kiniray-anom, Kalinga-Banao,
Waray, and Ilonggo.
20. According toTimbreza, the Filipino philosophy of
life can be divided into six fragments: “the law of
reversions, balance of nature, cyclic concepts of
nature, centripetal morality, the value of non-
violence, and concept of life and death”.
Considering these ideas, Filipino thought is not a
philosophy of being (as a Greek thinker espoused)
but rather the intellectualization of “indigenous
perceptions of reality”.
