Loób and Kapwa Thomas Aquinas and a Filipino Virtue Ethics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
KU Leuven Humanities and Social Sciences Group Institute of Philosophy LOÓB AND KAPWA THOMAS AQUINAS AND A FILIPINO VIRTUE ETHICS Jeremiah REYES Supervisors: Prof. R. Friedman Prof. R. Pe-Pua Dissertation presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy September 2015 For my father and his unfailing love and support Acknowledgements I would like to thank my promotor, Prof. Russell Friedman, for his invaluable guidance and encouragement and for allowing me to pursue this topic under the auspices of the De Wulf-Mansion Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy. I would like to thank my co-promotor, Prof. Rogelia Pe-Pua, of the University of New South Wales for her careful corrections and for helping me be more grounded in the Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino Psychology) movement. I thank the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven for providing the IRO Scholarship, which has generously allowed me and many others like me from developing countries to pursue an enriching and life-changing education in Europe. I would like to thank Mr. Edmundo Guzman of the International Admissions and Mobility unit for his assistance since the beginning of my program. I thank retired professor James Op ‘t Eynde for patiently teaching me Latin. I would like to thank all my mentors and colleagues in the University of the Philippines, Diliman. I especially thank those who have each contributed something special to my philosophical education: Prof. Ciriaco Sayson, Prof. Liza Ruth Ocampo, Prof. Earl Stanley Fronda, Prof. Leonardo de Castro, and Prof. Allen Alvarez. From the Ateneo de Manila University, I would like thank Prof. Jovino Miroy who was instrumental in my coming to Leuven and Prof. Eduardo Calasanz. I thank the people and communities who have supported me during my stay here in Belgium: the Panopio family, Praise Center Antwerp, the Taguba family, the Filipino community of Leuven, the University Parish International Community (UPIC), the Sint-Kwinten’s English-speaking Catholic Community, and the Hernandez and Lasquety families in Illinois, USA. I would like to thank my family: my parents, Joey and Malou, my sister, Frances Joy, and my brother, Jerome, for their constant support and prayers. I thank my wife, Tina, the unexpected treasure I found in Leuven and my pilgrimage partner for life. I humbly thank the Sedes Sapientiae. Quid autem habeo quod non accepi? Jeremiah A. Lasquety-Reyes Contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Statement of purpose 1 1.2 Glossary of relevant concepts 3 1.3 Methodology and precedents 7 1.4 Value versus virtue 8 1.4.1 The discovery of Filipino “values” 9 1.4.2 The problem with Filipino “values” 13 1.4.3 The philosophical advantage of “virtues” 20 1.4.4 The international revival of virtue ethics 25 Chapter 2: The Three Intellectual Traditions in the Philippines 28 2.1 Southeast Asian tribal and animist tradition 33 2.1.1 Tribalism 35 2.1.2 Animism 39 2.2 Spanish Catholic tradition 43 2.2.1 Textualization and translation 46 2.2.2 The medieval time warp 48 2.2.3. Thomism as philosophical canon 50 2.3 American modern tradition 55 2.3.1 American education and democracy 57 2.3.2 Exclusive individualism 61 2.3.3. Three traditions in confusion 65 2.4 Filipino virtue ethics as a synthesis of three traditions 69 Chapter 3: The Two Pillars of Filipino Virtue Ethics: Loób and Kapwa 72 3.1 Loób 73 3.1.1 The modern Cartesian confusion 75 3.1.2 Loób as voluntas ut potentia animae (the will as a power of the soul) 78 3.1.3 The Filipino virtues as “habits” of the loób 85 3.1.4 The “holism” of loób 89 3.1.5 The “relationality” of loób towards the kapwa 92 3.2 Kapwa 96 3.2.1 What is kapwa? 97 3.2.2 Norris Clarke and a Thomistic metaphysics for kapwa 104 3.2.3 Kapwa in comparison to other ethical theories 110 3.3 Pagkakaisa: the goal of Filipino virtue ethics 115 Chapter 4: The Filipino Virtues 118 4.1 Thomist virtue ethics as the organizing framework 119 4.2 Kagandahang-loób 125 4.2.1 Kagandahang-loób actualizes the kapwa 125 4.2.2 The mother as the source and inspiration 129 4.2.3 Kagandahang-loób and Aquinas’ charity and benevolence 132 4.3 Utang-na-loób 137 4.3.1 Children towards their parents 144 4.3.2 Marcel Mauss and tribal gift exchange 146 4.3.3 Utang-na-loób and Aquinas’ justice 148 4.3.4 The exploitation of utang-na-loób in Philippine corruption 149 4.4 Pakikiramdam 152 4.4.1 Is pakikiramdam prudence or empathy? 152 4.4.2 Jokes (biro), lambing and tampo 158 4.4.3 The problem with pakikiramdam 161 4.5 Hiya 163 4.5.1 The virtue of hiya versus the passion of hiya 163 4.5.2 Hiya and Aquinas’ temperance 169 4.5.3 Amor propio, pakikisama, and “crab mentality” 172 4.5.3.1 Amor propio 172 4.5.3.2 Pakikisama 174 4.5.3.3 “Crab mentality”/group amor propio 175 4.6 Lakas-ng-loób 178 4.6.1 Lakas-ng-loób and the bayani 178 4.6.2 Bahala na for the sake of the kapwa 181 4.6.3 Lakas-ng-loób and Aquinas’ courage and martyrdom 184 4.7 The Filipino virtues working together 186 Chapter 5: Conclusion 188 Bibliography 192 1 Introduction 1.1 Statement of purpose The seeds of this work came from two random encounters which happened at the same time. The first encounter was with Norris Clarke’s creative retrieval of Aquinas, in particular his emphasis on “person-in-relation” as a fundamental metaphysical principle. The second encounter was with the movement Virgilio Enriquez founded called Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino Psychology) and its “core value” called kapwa (the other person). My instinct at the time was that Clarke’s “person-in-relation” and Enriquez’s kapwa, though not exactly the same, were similar enough to be mutually enriching concepts. The first was backed up by the comprehensive metaphysics of Aquinas, the second by a real historical culture, specifically Filipino Tagalog culture. Perhaps in these two concepts one could have an interesting dialogue between metaphysics and living culture. But things became more interesting. From this starting point I further investigated the similarities between Thomism and Filipino values. What I found was that the correspondence between “person-in-relation” and kapwa was just the tip of the iceberg. Thomism in fact provides the philosophical resources for a brand new interpretation of what has for almost half a century only been called Filipino “values.” Thomism provides a “virtue ethics.” As I will argue in the first chapter, there are significant philosophical advantages to reinterpreting the Filipino “value system” as a Filipino “virtue ethics.” Ethical concepts which were often a source of bewilderment for Filipino scholars begin to make more sense, and form a more internally coherent system, once they are reinterpreted and rearranged as a virtue ethics. The primary goal of this dissertation is the articulation and organization of a “Filipino virtue ethics.” It is both a constructive and descriptive project. It is constructive in that it builds on the metaphysics, psychology and ethics of Aquinas in order to construct a Filipino virtue ethics. This foundation helps define Filipino ethical concepts and provides an organizing principle for these concepts. This project is also descriptive in that it takes into account how Filipino scholars have described these concepts, and even more importantly, how they simply work in the everyday life of Filipinos. The constructive aspect is validated only insofar as it provides a better explanation for what can be observed in real life. The first chapter of this dissertation is about setting the stage. It gives a glossary of the relevant concepts of Filipino virtue ethics on the one hand, and the relevant concepts of Thomism on the other. This is followed by a brief discussion of methodology and precedents. The last section of this chapter provides an explanation 1 of why the concept of “virtue” is superior to “values” when it comes to dealing with Filipino ethical concepts. The second chapter provides a very crucial “historical survey” of the Philippines in terms of the three major traditions: the Southeast Asian tribal and animist tradition, the Spanish Catholic tradition, and the American modern tradition. The first two provided the material for Filipino virtue ethics (the words, concepts, and the living practice) but the American tradition is what provided the scholarship into this material (the interpretation and theorizing). A major mistake to avoid is a mono- traditionalist interpretation of Filipino culture. Filipino culture is in fact what I call a “hybrid” culture still in the process of synthesis. The three traditions are important for a proper understanding and interpretation of Filipino ethical concepts. Moreover, this historical survey provides a historical justification for using Thomism insofar as Thomism is a part of the Spanish Catholic tradition and is a “historical insider,” so to speak. The third chapter focuses on the “two pillars” of Filipino virtue ethics, loób and kapwa. Loób is directly translated as “inside” and “will” and kapwa is directly translated as “other person.” But as I will explain, there are serious misunderstandings that can arise when they are explained from the modern frameworks of subjectivity/objectivity or liberal individualism, which is often taken for granted in English philosophical discourse. To combat these misunderstandings, I will borrow from Aquinas’ metaphysics and psychology and reinterpret loób and kapwa in a “pre-modern” way.