FILIPINO PHILOSOPHY: CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

FILIPINO PHILOSOPHY:A CRITICALBIBLIOGRAPHY,1774-1997

2nd edition

ROLANDO M. GRIPALDO

ForewordTomas G. Rosario Jr.

FILIPINO PHILOSOPHY: CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

Published in 2000by De La Salle University Press, Inc.2504 Leon Guinto St., Malate 1004, Manila, PhilippinesTel. No. (632) 536-1761; Telefax: (632) 526-5139E-mail: press@mail.dlsu.edu.phHomepage: http://www.dlsupress.comSecond Printing 2001Copyright © 2000 by Rolando M. GripaldoALL RIGHTS RESERVED.No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in anyform or by any means—whether virtual, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording orotherwise—without the written permission of the copyright owner.ISBN: 971-555-344-3

FILIPINO PHILOSOPHY: CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

iii

FOREWORD TO THESECOND EDITION

This second edition of R. M. Gripaldo’s

Filipino philosophy: A criticial bibliography,1774-1997

could be considered as a landmark in the history of research on the works of Filipino philosophical thinkers and scholars. No similar achievement of this magnitude, asfar as I know, has ever been done or published. One is tempted to assert that this is his

magnum opus

—he notes, however, that this is an ongoing project every five years—if onemeasures it in terms of time, effort, and sacrifice invested and in terms of its immeasurablevalue to current and future scholars on “Filipino philosophy.” It is then an outstanding and,probably, an unsurpassable scholarship feat.The author discloses a very broad-minded view of “Filipino philosophy” in thisexhaustive bibliography of books, articles, reviews, translations, and poems on wide-rangingtopics that are directly or indirectly philosophical. Although he has a bias for what he callsthe “traditional approach” to philosophy, he expands his conception of Filipino philosophy totwo other approaches: namely, the “constitutional” and the “anthropological.” He admits thatworks falling under the category of either the constitutional approach or the anthropologicalapproach cannot be considered “Filipino philosophies” in the strict sense; nonetheless, hedeems it appropriate to include them in this compilation based on his perspective as ahistorian of Filipino philosophy.In view of the current vision and the growing desire among Filipino teachers of philosophy to explore the possible resources of “Filipino philosophy,” we may gladlyendorse Dr. Gripaldo’s holistic approach to this bibliography of Filipino writings on Filipino

Volkgeist

. One may not agree with him on the inclusion in this compilation of works that fallunder the “constitutional” and “anthropological” views of philosophy. In other words,writings that are not specifically philosophical in character might be deemed misplaced inthis bibliography by scholars of “pure philosophy.” A criticism of this nature, however,entails the contemporary problematic of whether philosophy in general should be anexclusive enterprise or should it be in dialogue with the natural and social sciences for it tobe relevant. What is, at least, significant in this research is that the author provides us with anexpanded area for the exploration of Filipino philosophical insights and reflections towardsthe enrichment of Filipino self-understanding and the development of a “Filipinophilosophy.”With this improved and updated compilation, Filipino scholars and researchers in thefield of philosophy can seriously shift their interest from a Western outlook of philosophy toan indigenous philosophical world-view. This vast research material should encourageFilipino philosophy teachers to initiate a collaboration among themselves in order to