What’s In

Analyze the picture and answer the questions below in your notebook.

Source: https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog30/sites/www.e-
education.psu.edu.geog30/files/system_diagram_example.png

a. How does your environment affect your life?

b. Why do you think, does this phenomenon happen?

What’s New

Important Thinkers of the Revolutionary Period

JOSE RIZAL (REFORMIST) (1861–1996)

The most influential figure of the Revolutionary period was Jose

Source:
Rizal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C
3%A9_Rizal
It was during his stay in Europe that he penned two of his most
important works, which are believed to have sparked the 1896 Revolution: Noli Me
Tangere (1887) and El Filibusterismo (1891). The two are fictional works which were
based on the social issues that Filipinos were experiencing during that period –
inequality, racism, and colonialism, among others.
Rizal claimed that the form of revolution that the Philippines needed to go
through is that of intellectual revolution, such that every Filipino should be educated
well on the concepts and exercise of freedom and it can only be attained by educating

5
the masses of the truth – a truth that is based on science and rational thinking, and
non from the morality-based education provided by the Church.

Andres Bonifacio (1863 – 1897)

Bonifacio is the founder of the revolutionary society,
Katipunan. When Spanish authorities discovered it, the society
already had some 30,000 members in a period of approximately
six months. Three days after the founding of La Liga Filipina, Rizal
was banished to Dapitan in Mindanao, the southern part of the
Philippines. Bonifacio, a member of the Liga, thought that was the
end of the line and founded the Katipunan (Gripaldo 2013). Source:

According to Bonifacio a man’s worth is not measured by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr

%C3%A9s_Bonifacio

his stations in life neither by the height of his nose nor the fairness
of skin and certainly not by whether he is a priest claiming to be God’s deputy. Even if
he is a tribesman from the hills and speaks only his own tongue, a man is an honorable
man if he possesses good character, is true to his word, has fine perceptions and is
loyal to his native land.

Apolinario Mabini (1864 – 1903)

Apolinario Mabini became well known in Philippine history

as the “Sublime Paralytic” and the “Brains of the Revolution.”
Mabini was born to an illiterate farmer and market vendor
with seven other children in Tanauan, Batangas, Mabini had no
initial economic and social capital that could have secured him a
good education. Nevertheless, he was able to receive
scholarships and part-time jobs teaching children, which allowed
him to complete a bachelor of Arts degree at the Colegio de San
Source:
Juan de Letran and a Bachelor of Laws at UST. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apo

Another struggle that he overcame was his paralysis. In linario_Mabini

1895, Mabini was struck with polio and lost the capacity of his lower limbs. During such
time, he had started writing his most influential works – El Verdadero Decálogo (The
True Decalogue) and Ordenanza de la Revolución (The Ordinance of the Revolution).
According to Mabini, humans are naturally good. It is from this stand that he
argues for the concepts of freedom being a by-product of people’s exercise of
goodness (rationality and being just). Mabini said, “True liberty is only for what is good
and never for what is evil; it is always in accordance with reason and the upright and
honest conscience of the individual”. He also distinguished reason as a key element
in the citizens’ participation in political life. It is also the same element that should guide
revolutions because without reason, such movement will be mere futile, if not
disastrous for the society. This is clearly synonymous to Rizal’s call of reliance on the
“Truth”.

6
Emilio Jacinto (REVOLUTIONIST) (1875 – 1899)

Emilio Jacinto popularly referred to as the “Brains of the

Katipunan” due to significant contributions to the Katipunan, primarily
his Kartilya ng Katipunan (Primer of Katipunan) and his article
published in Kalayaan. He became Andres Bonifacio’s advisor and
secretary. Source:
While Jacinto died at the young age of 23 due to malaria, he https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
/Emilio_Jacinto
remained as one of the most recognized heroes from the
Revolutionary period due to his literary works that guided the Katipunan.
The Kartilya, which became the source of values of the revolutionaries,
exemplified core values like that of charity, piety, honor, and equality. His concepts of
charity were linked with the performance of care for others that is void of self-interest.
A person helping another without expecting anything in return is an example of
Jacinto’s ideal charity. Piety, according to Jacinto, is the practice of charity wherein a
true pious individual would extend support to others and conduct himself or herself
with fairness. With fairness comes honor, an honorable person is one who has
commitment to his or her word, integrity, and the well-being of his or her countrymen.
Finally, Jacinto promoted the concept of equality in three respects: race, gender, and
social status. He argued that any person, whatever his social class, gender or skin
color, should be treated fairly. He highlighted the importance of women in the process
of building a strong society, the capacity of the underprivileged to contribute to social
development, and the irrelevance of one’s race in his or her capacity to be a good
citizen.

Manual L Quezon (Political Philosopher) (1878 – 1944)

Manuel L. Quezon was elected as the Commonwealth president in

1935, Quezon now buttressed his political ideas with some educational
and social thought. He believed in Social Darwinism—that governments Source:
https://en.wikipe
are products of political struggles for survival.
Quezon’s political philosophy consists of two strands: political pragmatism and
political preparation for an eventual Philippine independence. Political pragmatism is
the principle, which says that one must fight for a goal, but if obstacles towards that
goal are difficult to surmount, then one must fall back to an alternative that is better
than nothing provided it is in the right direction.
He believed in justice for all, a social justice that would allow the working class
to receive decent compensation to enjoy culture and leisure. His social justice program
included higher wages, credit facilities that would allow the Filipinos the opportunity to
earn a decent livelihood, and the protection of the rights of women and the poor,
among others.
According to Quezon, there can be no progress except under the auspices of
peace. Without peace and public order, it will be impossible to promote education,

7
improve the condition of the masses, protect the poor and ignorant against exploitation
and otherwise ensure the enjoyment of life, liberty and property.

Important Thinkers of the Post-Revolutionary Period

Isabelo De Los Reyes (1864 – 1938)

Isabelo de los Reyes is referred to by many historians as the

“Father of Filipino Socialism” due to his writing on anti-Catholicism
and labor unions. He was one of the founders of the Iglesia Filipina
Independiente (Philippine Independent Church) or the Aglipayan
Church, which is an independent Christian Protestant Church.
De los Reyes exhibited immense talent at a young age, having Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
won a silver medal for his work El folk-lore filipino (Filipino Folklore) Isabelo_de_los_Reyes

at the Exposición in Madrid. He founded the first labor union in the

country – the Unión Obrera Democrática.

Camilo O. Osias (1889 – 1976)

Camilo Osias advocated that the educational system must

contribute towards the achievement of the goals of education by
inculcating in the minds and hearts of the youth the value of
preserving the patrimony of the country, promoting the general
welfare of the people. He believes that education must secure for
every Filipino the fullest measure of efficiency, freedom, and
happiness.
Source:
Osia said, that “the school has an important role in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Camilo_Os%C3%ADas
dynamic nationalism and internationalism in relation to democracy
in the education of the youth. High educational institutions should do more to turn out
graduates who can think logically, scientifically and creatively.” And further he said,
that "our education should instill love for work, spirit of tolerance, respect for law, love
for peace and practice thrift".

CLARO M. RECTO
Claro M. Recto became known as the “foremost statesman” of
his generation due to the various nationalistic writings that he made as
a senator. Recto became known for his advocacy of highlighting
Filipino nationalism as opposed to the colonial backdrop that most
people were embracing. He was often heard and read advocating the Source:
“Filipino First Policy,” where he claimed that our country’s https://en.wikipedia.or
g/wiki/Claro_M._Recto
development will depend on the extent by which our country and its interest would be
prioritized before those of other countries, especially our former colonial “masters.”

8
 For Recto, a true free government is that which is capable of making economics
and social decisions for its citizens without placing as its primary consideration the
interests of other governments.

Virgilio Enriquez (1942 -1994)

Virgilio Enriquez, considered the Father of Sikolohiyang Pilipino

(Filipino psychology). Sikolohiyang Pilipino is the scientific study
derived from the experience, ideas, and cultural orientation of the
Filipinos (Yacat 2013).
Sikolohiyang Pilipino or Indigenous Filipino Psychology is
also known as Kapwa Psychology. Kapwa Psychology draws from folk Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w
practices as much as from modern theory. It perceives no iki/Virgilio_Enriquez
contradiction between indigenous folk beliefs and modern psychological concepts and
scientific norms. It includes in its study the IKSP of healing from the Babaylan and
Albolaryos (native shamans and healers) as well as the religio-political approaches of
the Filipino mystics and folk heroes and other ancestral ways of knowing. Kapwa
psychology implies a call for social action. Scholars and students are encouraged to
go to the villages to learn from the people and in turn, serve them with the gain
knowledge.

Basic Tenets and Key Concepts in Sikolohiyang Pilipino

Accommodative values (colonial):

HIYA (propriety/dignity)

UTANG NG LOOB (gratitude/solidarity)

Pivotal interpersonal value: Core Values Linking socio-personal values:

PAKIKIRAMDAM (shared inner KAPWA KAGANDAHANG LOOB

perception) (shared/humanity)
(share identity)

Confrontative values (surface):

BAHALA NA (determination)

LAKAS NG LOOB (guts/courage)

Value System of Philippine Psychology

Source: DIWA Senior High School Series: Discipline and Ideas in Social Sciences 2016

9
Core Values or Kapwa (Togetherness)
The concept of kapwa (shared identity) is the core of Sikolohiyang Pilipino and
heart of the structure of Filipino values. Pakikipagkapwa means treating the other
person as kapwa or fellow human being.

Two categories of kapwa:

1. Ibang Tao (outsider)

• Pakikitungo: civility
• Pakikisalamuha: act of mixing
• Pakikilahok: act of joining
• Pakikibagay: act of conformity
• Pakikisama: Being united with the group

2. Hindi Ibang Tao (insider/one-of-us)

• Pakikipagpalagayang-loob: Act of mutual trust
• Pakikisangkot: Act of joining others
• Pakikipagkaisa: being one with others

Examples of Filipino Values:

❖ Hospitality - the friendly and generous reception and entertainment of guests,

visitors, or strangers
❖ Utang na loob – debt of gratitude.
❖ Bahala na – fatalism or determination and being risk taker. Bahala na ang Diyos
(God will take care of us)

Pivotal interpersonal Value

Another significant Filipino value is that of pakikiramdam (shared inner
perception) which is considered as the pivotal interpersonal value. Within this value,
Filipinos use their inner perception of the other’s emotion in order to efficiently interact
with them.

Linking Socio-personal Values

Another value that contributes to our practice of pakikipagkapwa is that of
kagandahang loob (shared humanity), in which this value shows an act of charity
toward others. The practice of bayanihan or community-based action entails the
participation of the community on a task that is meant to improve the quality of life and
livelihood of the members of the locality. Various terms from different locality use to
refer to bayanihan: pintakasi (Samar), kapanyidungan (Batanes), tiklos (Leyte), and
bataresan (Southern Tagalog).

10
Accommodative Surface Values
The bayanihan or any form of kagandahang loob is always framed within
another set of Filipino values, which are labeled as accommodative surface values.
These values include hiya (propriety/dignity), utang na loob (debt of gratitude), and
pakikisama (esteem/companionship).

Confrontative Surface Values

Confrontative surface values that Filipinos exhibited especially when
confronted by difficult situation these includes bahala na (determination), lakas ng loob
(guts/courage), and pakikibaka (resistance).

Societal Values
According to Enriquez, Filipinos also hold societal values which he called
pagpapahalagang panlipunan. These values include karangalan (honor), katarungan
(justice), and kalayaan (freedom), which are essential to the preservation of Filipino
societal order and harmony. Moreover, these values shape a psychological unity
among Filipino communities as they build a common perception of moral obligation to
other members of the community who are considered as kapwa.

Zeus A. Salazar (1934 – Present)

Zeus Salazar was one of the Filipino scholars who were

trained and whose methods were derived from the West, and he
argued for a shift in perspective. He developed his lifelong crusade
for a nationalist brand of history that became a staple perspective for
the next generation of history students, that is, the pantayong
pananaw.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi
Key Arguments of the Pantayong Pananaw ki/Zeus_A._Salazar

The primary arguments of the pantayong pananaw is the need of reorienting

contemporary historian on the “right” way of reconstructing the past based on who is
talking for whom, with whom, and to whom. According to Salazar, there are three
perspectives by which Philippine history was and is being written.

Pangkayong Pananaw (from-you-for-us)

This perspective is used by Western historians – who used their own cultural
background and their countries’ politico-economic agenda – in framing the events that
transpired in our country. This perspective is used by foreigners or outsiders in talking
about or refencing a particular culture, its people, and their customs. To illustrate: the
British would say, “You Filipinos are different from us in many aspects.” (Kayong mga
Pilipino ay iba sa amin sa maraming bagay)

11
Pangkaming Pananaw (from-us-for-you)
The pangkaming perspective launched works on the Philippines made by
Filipinos for Western consumption. It is used when a native talk to outsiders or
foreigners regarding his or her own society and culture. Ones’ own language may or
may not be used. The main goal of the pangkaming pananaw is to correct the
erroneous Western analysis of the Philippine context.

Pantayong Pananaw (from-us-for-us)

Philippine history should be written and consumed primarily by Filipinos and to
achieved this goal a key element needs to be addressed – the use of the Filipino
language in transmitting knowledge. Salazar states that a community, society, or
culture can claim to have pantayong pananaw only if all its members use concepts
and manifest habits and behaviors whose meanings can be understood by all, like
when we say “We Filipinos” (Tayong mga Pilipino), including the relationship between
the meanings. This is made possible with the existence of a language, which is the
basis and channel of understanding and knowledge.

Local Language for Discourse

According to Salazar, Philippine history should be written in the local language
or dialect for two important reasons: (1) the local terms, when transposed to Western
language, lose their actual meanings and historical significance; and (2) our history
should be discussed among ourselves and not for the others. The use of local
language characterizes the pantayong pananaw.
Salazar urged the Filipino nation to have a talastasang bayan that is oriented
toward discussion of Philippine history for the Filipinos and by the Filipinos.

What is It

We can say that what our intellectual forefathers did was to provide a corpus of
academic studies that served not only to teach but also to inspire. Their studies can
be considered as the basis of Philippine Social Science, which was not detached from
reality and applied to the needs and conditions of their times. Social Science, thus,
from the very start was about revealing the nature of social reality and implied that
there were things to do in order to correct or improve the current material condition
and consciousness of the people.

12
 Examine the words above and look for their:
a. Dictionary or denotative meaning, and
b. Cultural and practical meaning

Note: Write the answers in your activity notebook

What’s New

Pambansang Photobomber is
what they call the building which serves
as an unwanted backdrop to the iconic
monument of the national hero, Jose
Rizal. It is located in Luneta Park, Manila
where the condominium building seems
to distract viewers and distorts the
immaculate and postcard-worthy scenery
Source: https://www.globalconstructionreview.com/news/work-
of the Rizal Shrine. photobomb-philippine-tow7er-resta7rt-aft7er/

Is it really just a matter of perspective” or do we recognize the fact that the

issue of national dignity, tradition, and heritage is a reality that must be given due
consideration and respect? It is ironic to note that the monument of Jose Rizal, who
epitomizes the Filipino struggle for dignity and honor, is now the subject of
controversy due to an allegedly blatant disregard for not only the national hero but
also for our national history and memory.

Philippine Social Science or “indigenized social science”

Indigenization is a process in which there is a purposive and conscious effort

to translate and interpret foreign academic concepts, canons and methods. The point
is that ideas – academic tenets and intellectual trends – can never be imported at
face value. It can never be made useful without refashioning it into the rhythm and
tempo of a particular group of people. Hence, the word “indigenization” refers to a
process, in fact, a tedious and long process, of acceptance and understanding, in
which those foreign concepts and idea are made relevant to a specific group of
people whose culture and history differ very much from the originators of the said
“imported” ideas.

3
 Nevertheless, importing of ideas is not at all bad; what is important is that
these are “translated” into one’s cultural, social and psychological milieu. By
translations, we mean, we do not only look for a direct semantic equivalent of it, but
also look for its parallel in our culture. Hence, we adopt yet we discriminate too. With
ideas, we refashion, reconfigure, reconstruct, and reinterpret, in accordance with our
needs as a thinking, sensible, rational, and discriminating group of people. In this
case, we require imported Social Science ideas to respond to the needs of the
Filipino and to make those ideas work for the Filipino. We require that within our own
cultures and history, we offer concepts that will serve as our contributions to global
social ideas.

Do we clamor for intellectual independence or a Continued State of Academic

Dependency?

Do we simply copy what we see from the outside and attempt to employ or
apply it in our specific situation? While some have been successful in this endeavor,
a lot of them failed as well. For those who have become successful, there was
something that facilitated its success. More often than not, it was culture and an
appropriate cultural translation and adaptation. Let us take for example, the field of
business and commerce where introduction of a foreign product is part and parcel of
economic growth and dynamic, capitalist ventures. When introducing a foreign brand
or a product for Filipino consumers, market strategists have learned that somehow,
they should be able to culturally “translate” those products or business ideas into the
needs of their prime targets – the Filipino consumers. Otherwise, they will not be
patronized, and they will lose money. Just look at how certain giant multinational
foreign business or restaurant chains incorporate culture into their already globally
recognizable products thus by incorporating, say, rice meals or employing “pinoy”
sensibilities in order to fit into the Philippine market. A hamburger chain puts a “pinoy
touch” by introducing “tipi” sets in its menu. A chicken fast food also did the same
with much success.

In other parts of the world, multinational companies or giant American

restaurant chains need to adapt to local culture and infuse local flavor in order to fit
into the senses of the native population. Recently, it is Korean cuisines that have
been invading the Philippine food scene. Philippine dishes such as adobo and
lechon are the next big thing in the US. Surely, mobility of nationalities such as
expatriate and migrant Filipinos abroad, the rise of Korean tourists here in the
country, and increasing intermarriage among different nationalities contribute to the
niche in international cuisines. In the same manner, no ideas will forever remain
foreign without the intervention of local culture, without subjecting it to the social,
cultural, political, and economic processes.

Sometimes, it is easy to say that nothing could be distinctly Filipino with all the
diversity of, say, food, in our society. It is also tempting to declare, especially by an

4
outsider, that all of our good traits were borrowed from foreigners or were brought
here by them. Are we really a product of various layers of “influences” from the
outside that there is no core value in our social existence? We need to abandon this
mindset, which is also represented in the analogy of banana or lemon where one just
peels off the outer layers of the fruit in order to get to it. What we need to do is to
discover our core values as Filipinos by a meticulous and sensitive self-examination.
Needless to say, the concepts that should capture the essence of being a Filipino,
are the concepts found in the Filipino social world, consciousness and experience.

Indigenization, without its complicated and highfalutin academic jargon, is

probably the most common social process that we have ever seen in life. The
process of indigenization is at work ever since humans thought of importing and
borrowing ideas from one another.

An already indigenized Social Science is an ideal scenario. It is an ideal

situation where our thoughts, ideas, and manner of reasoning are all products of our
own of thinking, culture, environment, social context, etc. During this envisioned
state, we no longer look for outside ideas, theories, or methods when dealing with
our own problems and conditions.

Ideas are also a point of contention and is a reflection of position of power.

The traditionally and historically recipients of such Western-molded social theories
and methods are the so-called global South, of which the Philippines and most of
Southeast Asian countries are part of. They are the economically “dependent”
nations who are integrated into the economies of much wealthier and more powerful
Northern counterparts (by North, we mean the Western powers of Europe and the
US) because Southeast Asian countries provide raw materials and the Northern
countries provide and manufacture the finished consumer products. The national
histories of the South are also intertwined with the expansionist tradition of the West
as colonizers. Though the global South are no longer colonies, they still remain
bonded, and the ties with the interests of their respective former colonial masters. In
academic life, as well as in its economic and political side, the global South still
confronts this reality – that is of how to get away from the bondage of neocolonialism
and dependency status. Ideas do have ancestry. They too have kinship. With a
seemingly neocolonial relationships, ideas promoted among centers of learning in
the global South have also been dependent on the ideas promoted and are being
used in the West. Pioneer Filipino social scientists, especially during the pre-World
War II era, have been educated in the centers of learning in the US, the colonizer of
the Philippine islands. Right after World War II, second generation Filipino social
scientists were also trained in the same country, but not for long. Eventually, recently
arrived social scientists as well as home-grown Filipino intellectuals clamored for a
more relevant and in the language that we use in this section, “indigenized”
academe. Indigenization movement gained momentum.

5
 Three Strands of Agham Panlipunang Pilipino (Filipino Social Science)

In contemporary times, three strands of Filipino Social Sciences have

trailblazed the Philippine academe and are already enshrined in Philippine
intellectual history. The indigenized form and structure of the said discipline is not
only as a separate track of academic social science but also as a Filipino
contribution to the discipline of social science in general. This is the Filipino
contribution to the global field of social inquiry.

Pantayong Pananaw/Bagong Kasaysayan, Pilipinolohiya, and Sikolohiyang

Pilipino were spearheaded by Zeus Salazar, Prospero Covar, and Virgilio Enriquez.
Incidentally, all of them are from the University of the Philippines, of the same
generation, and were part of the intellectual ferment for the Philippine academe
during 1970s. Salazar is a historian-ethnologist, Covar is an anthropologist, and
Enriquez is a psychologist. All of them attempted to come up with a Filipino
academic discipline based on the idea that Filipino culture, society, and language
should provide the necessary tools, concepts, and discourse consciousness, social
relations, and social organizations. Only a contextualized and culturally sensitive
theorizing and methodology could sufficiently explain who we are as people.
Eventually, these attempts gained momentum, attracted like-minded intellectuals in
search for meaning and purpose of study, and converted nonbelievers by showing
them how futile it is to depend on Western concepts and models in explaining the
Filipino. In every culture, every group of people must have a model in social reality
and phenomenon that can be explained and interpreted. These three strands of
Agham Panlipunang Pilipino are now full-blown schools of thoughts that are being
taught not only in the University of the Philippines but also in many universities and
colleges in the Philippines. They were also made part of the intellectual discussions
in international academic circles.

Pantayong Pananaw posits that history is not only about recording of events,
much like the tradition of historia/histoire/history of the West but also about finding
meaning in past events. That is why we are very lucky that we have a rich discourse
on this matter based on the indigenous concept, kasaysayan, which is about the past
based on the idea of saysay or meaning. Salazar went on to propose a new timeline
or periodization of Philippine history, which he calls Bagong Kasaysayan (or new
history) based on the internal logic of historical events and not on the traditional and
colonial parameters of periodization such as the coming of the colonizers in
successive periods.

Pilipinolohiya (or Philippine Studies) also states that the Philippines and the
Filipinos must be studied and investigated using methodologies and conceptual tools
drawn from Filipino culture, society, and experience. Just like in Pantayong Pananaw
and Bagong Kasaysayan, language is of ultimate importance because it is only
through the local language that a talastasan and dalumat as intellectual discourses

6
could be created among the Filipino scholars and Filipino scholars and Filipino public
in general. Ideologically, Pilipinolohiya is a response to the seeming academic
imperialism of which and powerful Western nations. Almost all of them have
established cooperation agencies and specialized study centers in developing
countries in order to maintain their influence and control under the guise of economic
cooperation and pursuit of intellectual interests. Hence, Philippine Studies as an
intellectual project has been established in the US, Europe, Japan, and recently,
China and Korea, not for the benefit of the Filipinos themselves but for the benefit of
the sponsoring nations who wish to understand the Philippines and its people.
Pilipinolohiya maintains that we should have our own purpose, set our own
intellectual course, and steer our own ideology in the service of the Filipino and for
the betterment of our society.

The aims and intellectual premises of the Sikolohiyang Pilipino (or Filipino
Psychology) do not stray away from those of Pantayong Pananaw and Pilipinohiya.
Like the first two, Sikolohiyang Pilipino, which was conceptualized and developed
during the same intellectual ferment of the 1970s, debated upon the usefulness and
appropriateness of Western models of psychology in defining the Filipino psyche.
What Enriquez argued was that those psychological explanatory models as well as
research techniques on human personality may not be enough to enable the
psychologist to dig deeply into the Filipino consciousness. Rather, a more culturally
sensitive approach beginning with pakapakapa, pakikipagpalagayang-loob, and
onwards to pakikisangkot and pakikiisa (they do not have direct equivalents in the
English language) should be the starting point of every social research. Such
research takes into consideration the people and their social world whether they are
being investigated by an outsider or of fellow Filipinos. Thus, it is not the surface
meanings that should matter like establishing smooth interpersonal relationships
among community members but a deeper concept of loob and kapwa, which
underscore the pakikipagkapwa as the Filipino way of dealing with the “other”.
Ultimately, the other is a kapwa, which is also an extension of oneself.

What is It
Perhaps what we can learn from these three strands of Agham Panlipunang
Pilipino is the fact that language is key to any form of knowledge because all of them
could not emphasize more how vital language is to doing research about the Filipino.
Learning about the native language, in the context of social research, is paramount
to understanding the people being investigated. It is because through language,
cultural information is stored and knowledge about the peoples’ social world is
revealed. The three schools of thought pushed the discussion further not only by
underscoring the importance of language but also by choosing to write or

7
 What’s New

SOCIAL PROBLEMS AND PHENOMENON

A social problem is an issue within the society that makes it difficult for people
to achieve their full potential. Social problems tend to develop when we become
neglectful and fail to see that serious problems are developing. Could these
problems have been prevented if our social institutions had been working well? I
think so, but this is where political philosophies are important to understand. Some
people believe that the government should be very involved in providing services to
people most at risk.

A problem is a condition of discontentment resented by someone. But when it

is resented by many people, it becomes a social problem. For a problem to be social,
it must involve a large number of people, sometimes groups and institutions, who
consider a particular condition as undesirable and intolerable and want to correct
through a collective action.

Thus, not all problems are social, unless the discontented persons come in
contact, vocalize their discontentment and associate to do something for its solution.
A problem becomes social when it is communicated to others and the activity of one
person leads to a similar activity for other persons. Thus, a social problem is different
from an individual problem. Individual problem is one which is felt by only one
person or a small group of people.
It does not affect the public at large. Its resolutions lie within the power and
immediate milieu of the individual or group. A public issue however requires a
collective approach for its solutions.

No one individual or few individuals are responsible for the appearance of a

socially problematic situation and the control of this situation is also beyond the
ability of one person or a few persons.
Social problem is a generic term applied to a range of conditions and aberrant
behaviors which are manifestations of social disorganization. It is a condition which
most people in a society consider undesirable and want to correct by changing
through some means of social engineering or social planning‖ (Oxford Dictionary of
Sociology, 1994

4
Definition Sociologist
Those conditions or situations which members of the society Fuller and Myers
regard as a threat to their values‘. Elucidating their ideas, they (1941)
said at other place that it is ‗a condition which is defined by a
considerable number of persons as a deviation from some
social norms which they cherish‘.
‗A situation confronting a group or a section of society which Reinhardt
inflicts injurious consequences that can be handled only
collectively.‘
Hold that a social problem is ‗a problem of human relationship Raab and
which seriously threatens society or impedes the important Selznick (1959)
aspirations of many people‘.
‗A way of behaviour that is regarded by a substantial part of a Merton and
social order as being in violation of one or more generally Nisbet (1961)
accepted or approved norms‘.
A social problem as a ‗deviation from the social ideal Walsh and
remediable by group effort‘. Furfey
A social problem is ‗a condition which many people consider Horton and
undesirable and want to correct. It is a condition affecting a Leslie (1970)
significant number of people in ways considered undesirable,
about which it is felt that something can be done through
collective measures‘.

Components of social problem

1. An objective condition, like crime, poverty, communal tensions and so forth,
the presence and magnitude of which can be observed, verified and
measured by impartial social observers; and

2. A subjective definition by some members of the society that the objective

condition is a ‗problem‘ and must be acted upon. Here is where values come
into play. People start perceiving that some values are being threatened.

5
Elements of Social Problems:

Though the above cited definitions differ in ways that they are explained, the
following important characteristics may be discerned from them:

1. A condition or situation resented as objectionable by a significant number of

people.
2. It is considered as undesirable because of its injurious consequences.
3. All social problems want correction through collective action. They warrant
change in conditions via some means of social engineering.
4. All aberrant behaviors or deviations from accepted norms are termed as social
problems such as crime, juvenile delinquency, prostitution, rape, drug addiction,
and domestic violence, ethnic or communal tension.
5. Social problems are not static but change with the change in time and space.
Changes in law also affects the concept of social problem.

Types of Social Problems:

Sociologists distinguish between two types of social problems. First, problems
of social organization which are created by the way the community or the society is
organized. Community or society produces situations that some members of the
society refuse to accept as right or necessary or even inevitable. These are, for
instance, communalism, casteism, regionalism, poverty, gender discrimination,
population, environmental imbalance (different kinds of pollution, health hazards,
etc.). Second, problems of deviance having to do with the adjustment of people to
conventional ways of living. These include, for example, delinquency, drug addiction,
alcoholism, mental illness, various forms of sexual behavior (rape, incest, sodomy),
bigamy, prostitution, vandalism and host of other behaviors, most of which are
forbidden by law.

6
 What is It

Analyze the different situations about the various types of social problems.
Write A if the problems of social organization which are created by the way the
community or the society is organized and B if they are problems of deviance having
to do with the adjustment of people to conventional ways of living.

Situation Answer
1. Coral Reef Degradation
2. Gang
3. Cyber Sex

4. Unequal Career Opportunities

5. Malnutrition

What’s More

Activity 1: Picture Analysis

Which of the following describes social problems? Identify each type.

A. B.

Source:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/04/c1/a2/04c1a251b0f8c16876a
442db6e315558.jpg Source: https://voice.global/assets/2016/08/03-LGBT-
e1505922182922.png

A B

7
 in chaos unless society limits them.

What’s In

Social sciences are like different people. Each discipline has its own interest
on how to approach society for help. Some forms of help raise awarenss among us,
others take the challenge to perform a task in different angles.

What’s New

Sociological Perspectives on Social Problems

The Sociological Imagination

Many individuals experience one or more social problems personally. For

example, a lot of people are poor and unemployed, many are in poor health, others
have family problems, drink too much alcohol, or commit crime.
Sociology takes a different approach, as it stresses that individual problems
are often rooted in problems stemming from aspects of society itself. This key insight
informed C. Wright Mills’ (1959) classic distinction between personal
troubles and public issues. Personal troubles refer to a problem affecting individuals
that the affected individual, as well as other members of society, typically blame on
the individual’s own personal and moral failings. Examples include such different

3
problems as eating disorders, divorce, and unemployment. Public issues, whose
source lies in the social structure and culture of a society, refer to social problems
affecting many individuals.
To illustrate Mills’ viewpoint, let’s use our sociological imaginations to
understand some contemporary social problems. We will start with unemployment,
which Mills himself discussed. If only a few people were unemployed, Mills wrote, we
could reasonably explain their unemployment by saying they were lazy, lacked good
work habits, and so forth. If so, their unemployment would be their own personal
trouble. But when millions of people are out of work, unemployment is best
understood as a public issue because, as Mills (1959) put it, ―the very structure of
opportunities has collapsed. Both the correct statement of the problem and the range
of possible solutions require us to consider the economic and political institutions of
the society, and not merely the personal situation and character of a scatter of
individuals.‖
Picking up on Mills’ insights, William Ryan (1976) pointed out that Americans
typically think that social problems such as poverty and unemployment stem from
personal failings of the people experiencing these problems, not from structural
problems in the larger society.
To help us understand a blaming-the-victim ideology, let’s consider why poor
children in urban areas often learn very little in their schools. According to Ryan, a
blaming-the-victim approach would say that the children’s parents do not care about
their learning, fail to teach them good study habits, and do not encourage them to
take school seriously.
As this example suggests, a blaming-the-victim approach points to solutions
to social problems such as poverty and illiteracy that are very different from those
suggested by a more structural approach that blames the system. If we blame the
victim, we would spend the small amount of money we have to address the personal
failings of individuals who suffer from poverty, illiteracy, poor health, eating disorders,
and other difficulties. If instead we blame the system, we would focus our attention
on the various social conditions (decrepit schools, cultural standards of female
beauty, and the like) that account for these difficulties. A sociological understanding
suggests that the latter approach is ultimately needed to help us deal successfully
with the social problems facing us today.

Theoretical Perspectives

Three theoretical perspectives guide sociological thinking on social problems:

functionalist theory, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionist theory. These
perspectives look at the same social problems, but they do so in different ways.
Their views taken together offer a fuller understanding of social problems than any of
the views can offer alone. Table 1.1 ―Theory Snapshot‖ summarizes the three
perspectives.

4
Theoretical Major assumptions
perspective
Functionalism Social stability is necessary
for a strong society, and
adequate socialization and
social integration are
necessary for social stability.
Society’s social institutions
perform important functions
to help ensure social
stability. Slow social change
is desirable, but rapid social
change threatens social
order.
Conflict theory Society is characterized by
pervasive inequality based
on social class, race, gender,
and other factors. Far-
reaching social change is
needed to reduce or
eliminate social inequality
and to create an egalitarian
society.
Symbolic People construct their roles
interactionism as they interact; they do not
merely learn the roles that
society has set out for them.
As this interaction occurs,
individuals negotiate their
definitions of the situations in
which they find themselves
and socially construct the
reality of these situations. In
doing so, they rely heavily on
symbols such as words and
gestures to reach a shared
understanding of their
interaction.
Source: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-socialproblems/chapter/1-2-sociological-
perspectives-on-social-problems/
Functionalism
5
Views of social problems
Social problems weaken a
society’s stability but do not
reflect fundamental faults in
how the society is structured.
Solutions to social problems
should take the form of gradual
social reform rather than
sudden and far-reaching
change. Despite their negative
effects, social problems often
also serve important functions
for society.
Social problems arise from
fundamental faults in the
structure of a society and both
reflect and reinforce inequalities
based on social class, race,
gender, and other dimensions.
Successful solutions to social
problems must involve far-
reaching change in the
structure of society.
Social problems arise from the
interaction of individuals.
People who engage in socially
problematic behaviors often
learn these behaviors from
other people. Individuals also
learn their perceptions of social
problems from other people.
 Functionalism, also known as the functionalist theory or perspective, arose
out of two great revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The first was
the French Revolution of 1789, whose intense violence and bloody terror shook
Europe to its core.
The Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth century reinforced these concerns.
Starting first in Europe and then in the United States, the Industrial Revolution led to
many changes, including the rise and growth of cities as people left their farms to live
near factories. As the cities grew, people lived in increasingly poor, crowded, and
decrepit conditions, and crime was rampant. Here was additional evidence, if
European intellectuals needed it, of the breakdown of social order.
This general framework reached fruition in the writings of Émile Durkheim
(1858–1917), a French scholar largely responsible for the sociological perspective,
as we now know it. Adopting the conservative intellectuals’ view of the need for a
strong society, Durkheim felt that human beings have desires that result in chaos
unless society limits them (Durkheim, 1952). It does so, he wrote, through two
related social mechanisms: socialization and social integration. Socialization helps
us learn society’s rules and the need to cooperate, as people end up generally
agreeing on important norms and values, while social integration, or our ties to other
people and to social institutions such as religion and the family, helps socialize us
and integrate us into society and reinforce our respect for its rules.
Today’s functionalist perspective arises out of
Durkheim’s work and that of other conservative intellectuals
of the nineteenth century. It uses the human body as a model
for understanding society. In the human body, our various
organs and other body parts serve important functions for the
ongoing health and stability of our body. Our eyes help us
see, our ears help us hear, our heart circulates our blood, and
so forth. Just as we can understand the body by describing
and understanding the functions that its parts serve for its
health and stability, so can we understand society by
describing and understanding the functions that its parts—or, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wiki
pedia/commons/thumb/2/23/%C
more accurately, its social institutions—serve for the ongoing 3%89mile_Durkheim.jpg/260px-
health and stability of society. Thus, functionalism %C3%89mile_Durkheim.jpg
emphasizes the importance of social institutions such as the
family, religion, and education for producing a stable society.
Émile Durkheim was a founder of sociology and is largely credited with
developing the functionalist perspective.
As these comments might suggest, functionalism views social problems as
arising from society’s natural evolution. When a social problem does occur, it might
threaten a society’s stability, but it does not mean that fundamental flaws in the
society exist. Accordingly, gradual social reform should be all that is needed to
address the social problem. Functionalism even suggests that social problems must
be functional in some ways for society, because otherwise these problems would not
continue. This is certainly a controversial suggestion, but it is true that many social

6
problems do serve important functions for our society. For example, crime is a major
social problem, but it is also good for the economy because it creates hundreds of
thousands of jobs in law enforcement, courts and corrections, home security, and
other sectors of the economy whose major role is to deal with crime. If crime
disappeared, many people would be out of work! Similarly, poverty is also a major
social problem, but one function that poverty serves is that poor people do jobs that
otherwise might not get done because other people would not want to do those
(Gans, 1972). Like crime, poverty also provides employment for people across the
nation, such as those who work in social service agencies that help poor people.

Conflict Theory

In many ways, conflict theory is the opposite of functionalism but ironically

also grew out of the Industrial Revolution, thanks largely to Karl Marx (1818–1883)
and his collaborator, Friedrich Engels (1820–1895).
According to Marx and Engels, every society is divided into two classes based
on the ownership of the means of production (tools, factories, and the like). In a
capitalist society, the bourgeoisie, or ruling class, owns the means of production,
while the proletariat, or working class, does not own the means of production and
instead is oppressed and exploited by the bourgeoisie. This difference creates an
automatic conflict of interests between the two groups. Simply put, the bourgeoisie is
interested in maintaining its position at the top of society, while the proletariat’s
interest lies in rising up from the bottom and overthrowing the bourgeoisie to create
an egalitarian society.
Marx and Engels’ view of conflict arising from unequal positions held by
members of society lies at the heart of today’s conflict theory. This theory
emphasizes that different groups in society have different interests stemming from
their different social positions. These different interests in turn lead to different views
on important social issues. Some versions of the theory root
conflict in divisions based on race and ethnicity, gender, and
other such differences, while other versions follow Marx and
Engels in seeing conflict arising out of different positions in the
economic structure. In general, however, conflict theory
emphasizes that the various parts of society contribute to
ongoing inequality, whereas functionalist theory, as we have
seen, stresses that they contribute to the ongoing stability of
society. Thus, while functionalist theory emphasizes the
benefits of the various parts of society for ongoing social
stability, conflict theory favors social change to reduce
inequality. https://cdn.britannica.co
Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels were m/22/59822-050-
98F24569/Karl-Marx-
intense critics of capitalism. Their work inspired the later 1870.jpg
development of conflict theory in sociology.

7
 Conflict theory in its various forms views social problems as arising from
society’s inherent inequality. Depending on which version of conflict theory is being
considered, the inequality contributing to social problems is based on social class,
race and ethnicity, gender, or some other dimension of society’s hierarchy. Because
any of these inequalities represents a fundamental flaw in society, conflict theory
assumes that fundamental social change is needed to address society’s many social
problems.

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic interactionism focuses on the interaction of individuals and on how

they interpret their interaction. Its roots lie in the work of early 1900s American
sociologists, social psychologists, and philosophers who were interested in human
consciousness and action. Herbert Blumer (1969), a sociologist at the University of
Chicago, built on their writings to develop symbolic interactionism, a term he coined.
Drawing on Blumer’s work, symbolic interactionists feel that people do not merely
learn the roles that society has set out for them; instead they construct these roles as
they interact. As they do so, they negotiate their definitions of the situations in which
they find themselves and socially construct the reality of these situations. In doing
so, they rely heavily on symbols such as words and gestures to reach a shared
understanding of their interaction.
Symbolic interactionism focuses on individuals,
such as the people conversing here. Sociologists favoring
this approach examine how and why individuals interact
and interpret the meanings of their interaction.
An example is the familiar symbol of shaking
hands. In the United States and many other societies,
shaking hands is a symbol of greeting and friendship. This
simple act indicates that you are a nice and polite person
with whom someone should feel comfortable with. To
reinforce this symbol’s importance for understanding a bit https://alchetron.com/cdn/her
of interaction, consider a situation where someone refuses bert-blumer-44bf50db-09bc-
4a98-bd44-682e4c52684-
to shake hands. This action is usually intended as a sign resize-750.jpeg
of dislike or as an insult, and the other person interprets it
as such. Their understanding of the situation and subsequent interaction will be very
different from those arising from the more typical shaking of hands. As the term
symbolic interactionism implies, their understanding of this encounter arises from
what they do when they interact and from their use and interpretation of the various
symbols included in their interaction. According to this theory, social order is possible
because people learn what various symbols (such as shaking hands) mean and
apply these meanings to different kinds of situations. If you visited a society where
sticking your right hand out to greet someone was interpreted as a threatening
gesture, you would quickly learn the value of common understandings of symbols.

8
 Applying the Three Perspective

To explain armed robbery, symbolic interactionist focus on how armed

robbers decide when and where to rob a victim and on how their interactions with
other criminals reinforce their own criminal tendencies.
To help you further understand the different views of these three theoretical
perspectives, let’s see what they would probably say about armed robbery, a very
serious form of crime, while recognizing that the three perspectives together provide
a more comprehensive understanding of armed robbery than any one perspective
provides by itself.
A functionalist approach might suggest that armed robbery actually serves
positive functions for society, such as the job-creating function mentioned earlier for
crime in general. It would still think that efforts should be made to reduce armed
robbery, but it would also assume that far-reaching changes in our society would be
neither wise nor necessary as part of the effort to reduce crime.
Conflict theory would take a very different approach to understanding armed
robbery. It might note that most street criminals are poor and thus emphasize that
armed robbery is the result of the despair and frustration of living in poverty and
facing a lack of jobs and other opportunities for economic and social success. The
roots of street crime, from the perspective of conflict theory, thus lie in society at
least as much as they lie in the individuals committing such crime. To reduce armed
robbery and other street crime, conflict theory would advocate far-reaching changes
in the economic structure of society.
For its part, symbolic interactionism would focus on how armed robbers make
such decisions as when and where to rob someone and on how their interactions
with other criminals reinforce their own criminal tendencies. It would also investigate
how victims of armed robbery behave when confronted by a robber. To reduce
armed robbery, it would advocate programs that reduce the opportunities for
interaction among potential criminal offenders, for example, after-school programs
that keep at-risk youths busy in ―conventional‖ activities so that they have less time
to spend with youths who might help them get into trouble.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
 According to C. Wright Mills, the sociological imagination involves the ability to
recognize that private troubles are rooted in public issues and structural
problems.
 Functionalism emphasizes the importance of social institutions for social
stability and implies that far-reaching social change will be socially harmful.
 Conflict theory emphasizes social inequality and suggests that far-reaching
social change is needed to achieve a just society.
 Symbolic interactionism emphasizes the social meanings and understandings
that individuals derive from their social interaction

9
 Process questions:

1. Select an example of a ―private trouble‖ and explain how

and why it may reflect a structural problem in society.

2. At this point in your study of social problems, which one

of the three sociological theoretical perspectives sounds
most appealing to you? Why?

What is It

Activity: Graphic Organizer

Direction: Complete the graphic organizer below by writing down the three sociological
theoretical perspectives, their major assumptions and views of social problems. Copy and
answer the graphic organizer in your activity notebook.

Sociological
Theoretical
Perspective

10