With every critical and conscious notion, we often disregard its philosophical

concept and substitute it with the observable inquiry as we approach what is

conceivable to comprehend. It is but undeniable to neglect the illiteracy of those who
speak of various narratives—even in the context of patriotism. As evident in the article,
“Veneration Without Understanding” by Renato Constantino issued in 1970, we see the
incontestable exaggeration from a number of individuals over the potency of our
national hero, Jose Rizal. The author dared to question the laudation of the martyr
whose “repudiation of the Revolution was an act against the people,” accounted with the
overshadowing of a number of contributions from those involved at the time.
Constantino emphasized the significance on asserting reverence along with absolute
rationality in regards to articulating what it really meant to call one a hero. Doing so
would equate to man evaluating in the context of particular reality with the general
reality of one’s period, which the article concluded to define man as rational as he can
be with correspondence between his perception of reality and reality itself. Hence, it
would be most imperative and practical to approach Rizal’s limitations and weaknesses
in a critical sense as we have gained from his nobility.
Although it was argued that a “true Filipino” is one which the Ilustrados and many
at present fail to attain, we must decipher how such a distinction can be done with the
principal emphasis on independence alone. What seemed to be unheeded is the
rational philosophy on Rizal’s repudiation over the revolt, which the article failed to
appear satisfactory with regarding him as an Ilustrado. Despite the criticisms inscribed
by Constantino, Rizal would not be comparable to a simpleton to make quite a
statement concerning the revolution. We cannot deny the oppression of the Spaniards
and the lack of emphasis on the true identity of being a Filipino, but what the author left
out most importantly is the weakness of achieving such an identity—specifically at the
time. Condemning the repudiation as “an act against the people” seemed to be an
overstatement, for to critically analyze its philosophy would most likely benefit our
incipient nationality rather than deriving it solely on his classification as an Ilustrado. It is
but unwise to underestimate the system which hindered our distinction of a true Filipino.
We must also be careful on how we approach the concept of independence, for a nation
would be most fragile if it were to consider an unconscious movement without balancing
consciousness without a movement.