WHOLE BRAIN LEARNING SYSTEM

OUTCOME-BASED EDUCATION

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADE

Introduction to the Philosophy
of the Human Person 11/12

LEARNING QUARTER 3

MODULE WEEK
3-4

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 0

 MODULE IN

INTRODUCTION TO THE
PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN
PERSON

QUARTER 3
WEEK 3 & 4

TRUTH AND PHILOSOPHY

Development Team
Writer: Florendo D. Damaso, Jr.

Editors/Reviewers: Rhonel S. Bandiola Roxy G. Gaoiran

Richard A. Hapa

Layout Artist: Bryll B. Atienza

Management Team:

Vilma D. Eda Arnel S. Bandiola

Lourdes B. Arucan Juanito V. Labao

Imelda Fatima G. Hernaez

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 1

 WHAT I NEED TO KNOW

What this module is about?

In the previous chapter we learned about the meaning and the early beginnings of
philosophy. We also learned how to distinguish between personal and philosophical
questions. Most importantly, we were encouraged to ask philosophical questions. When we
start to raise such questions, we, ultimately, want to arrive at the truth. Nowadays, it is more
and more difficult to discern what is true from what is false; it seems that everybody can
claim to hold the truth.

Philosophy as a discipline is not claimed to be the sole bearer of truth. It is not so

much “the Truth” that concerns philosophy, but rather the way or process by which we can
distinguish claims that are true from those that are false. There is much more disagreement
rather than agreement among philosophers with regard to the question of truth.
Nevertheless, there is one thing that most of them agree on: that truth is not a simple matter
as much as human knowledge is just as complex a process.

Most Essential Learning Competencies (MELC)

1. Distinguish opinion from truth.
2. Realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth.
3. Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the methods of
philosophizing.

What you are expected to learn?

After going through the module, you are expected to be able to answer the following
questions:
✓ What is the importance of establishing the truth behind every opinion?
✓ How will you apply wisdom of truth in your daily life?
✓ What makes an argument valid?

Important Reminder

DO NOT WRITE ANYTHING IN THIS MODULE. This module is a government

property and other learners will use it again. You may use any clean sheet of paper that is
available in your home for your answers in the given activities. The rubrics and answer
keys for the activities are found on the latter page of this module for you to self-check your
answers. This module will be retrieved by the end of the week.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 2

 Lesson
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
1

WHAT’S IN

Lesson Motivation
Story Analysis

Man of a Life Support

A man who lives away from his family abroad has been in a state of coma, sustained
by life support from medical equipment for about two months. Doctors have told his friends
that he has a very low chance of being revived if they take away the life support from him.
It seems that they are left with no other option but to pull the plug than to keep him in life
support for years. As per hospital regulations, it is only family members who are allowed to
consent to pull the plug. The man’s brother finally arrived from his home country to give the
consent. Something strange happened, however, the moment the brother started talking to
the patient in a coma, they noticed that his vital sign began to stabilize. Days passed, and
the patient started to show signs of rapid improvement. The doctors up to this day are
unable to explain what has happened. Friends of the patient say the prayers of his
community for a miracle was granted. Others say that the presence of his brother had a
healing effect on him. Some doctors say that the medication must have worked in a way
that surprised the experts in the field. Today the man has fully survived his condition and is
as normal as he can be.

Things to ponder:
What do you think truly happened here? Who among the doctors, friends, and family
was right? What makes you think so?

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 3

 WHAT IS IT

Lesson Discussion

A. DOMAINS OF TRUTH

What is truth? What do we mean when we say that something is true? We often say
that something is true because it is based on facts. Furthermore, we say that something is
factual when it is scientifically proven, that is when it is backed by gathering, analysis, and
repeated verification. Some scientists, however, point out that scientific truths are part of
just one among the many ways of understanding truth. Philosophy has been aware that the
truth about truth remains to be a question for thousands of years now. To narrowly confine
truth to the scientific way of thinking is to claim the there is only ONE way of understanding
truth.

Objective Domain
Scientific truths are covered by the objective domain of life. This pertains to the
natural world that maintains relative independence from the perspective and attitude of
human beings that perceive them. Typhoon seasons, which belong to the natural realm
comes and goes whether we want it. Waters boiling point remains 100 degrees Celsius and
will remain so even if a powerful tyrant wants to change it.

Social Domain
In the social domain, “truth” is analogous with (not the exact equivalent) a general
agreement or consensus on what is right as opposed to what is wrong. For example, in a
chapel for prayer and meditation, we say that maintaining silence is good. But in a
basketball game, we say that we should cheer for our team as loudly as we can to keep
them motivated. We do not look at these two different situations as contradicting each other.
We understand that something is “true or good” in a particular context, while they are “false
or wrong” in another context. The truths in the social domain are mostly products of “an
agreement in society that has been established over time. It is in this way that norms or
values appear as truths.

Personal Domain
Aside from the social domain, there is also the personal domain where truths are
analogous with sincerity. When you say to another person. “I am telling the truth”, what you
usually mean by that statement is that our statements are consistent with our inner thoughts

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 4

and intentions. This is a precarious domain of truth because no one can have access to
our minds and our thoughts except ourselves. Even the one who claims to have psychic
powers that can read your mind will have to rely on your own confirmation if she in fact
reads you correctly. For this reason, the truths that we claim in this domain need
corresponding actions that will establish trust. A person who proves to be consistent with
what he declares about himself is regarded as authentic and can therefore be trustworthy.

B. TRUTH AND JUSTIFICATION

Richard Rorty offers a simple way of defining truth: truth can be understood as what
has passed “procedures of justification,” (Rorty, 1989). Justification means the process of
proving the truth or validity of a statement. This process is made up of ways of critically
testing a claim against certain criteria.

A scientific statement is held as true when it is justified by data gathered from

careful observation and analysis. Pharmaceutical companies convince doctors and
patients of the effectiveness of their medicine by publishing research findings examined
and critically analyzed by experts. Before a scientific journal gets published, it goes through
a rigorous review process where experts raise critical questions that the researchers should
be prepared to answer and defend with data. As soon as a scientific claim is no longer
questioned or criticized, it more or less gains the status of scientific truth. In the language
of Rorty, the claim of the scientist has passed the procedures of justification.

The justification of social norms takes longer than scientific truth. This is
especially true when those who are involved in the process of justifying them are
people coming from varying backgrounds and histories. Because of their differences
in their perspective, it is not easy to get a consensus or agreement. This is the reason why
social norms take time before they are turned into hard laws. Furthermore, even if they do
become laws, there is always the impending possibility of them being revoked or changed.
This is because norms that have become laws for a particular generation may no longer be
true for another generation. Despite the difficulty of gaining consensus, however, this does
not discount the possibility that we can talk about social “truth”. No matter how painful the
process of justification maybe, or no matter how long it takes, we cannot simply resort to
the easy way out by saying that anything goes”. “Social norms turned to social “truths” are
the basis for the balanced in our society. Without them, society will be no different from a
jungle in which only the strong and powerful survive.

The justification of personal truths is probably the longest to complete among

the three. This is because personal truths take a whole lifetime of consistency in the
actions and decisions of a person who makes a claim about himself. For example,
when someone says, “I love you” to his girlfriend, how would one know that this true? One
action four gifts, or a year of dating her would not be enough. True love as the adage goes,

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 5

is tested by time. A boyfriend can be said to be insincere or inauthentic when he only shows
his love for a few days and acts differently after he has been sexually satisfied. For this
reason, believing in someone’s sincerity takes a year of hard work. A more complicated
example is a person who has lived in the dark past but claims to have been converted.
Here it is more difficult to ascertain the truth of a person’s declaration of conversation must
be declared publicly. (Rousseau, 1953). In this way, the resolve to break away from a
person’s past inner life will have to be constantly proven and guaranteed through one’s
actions from the point of conversation onwards.

WHAT’S MORE

Activity 1.1: Check for Understanding

Directions: Identity to which domain of truth each of the following statements falls. Write
your answer on any clean sheet of paper and label it as Activity 1.1: Check for
Understanding.
_________________1. “In sickness and in health, ‘til death do us part.”
_________________2. Reptiles are cold-blooded.
_________________3. “Don’t talk when your mouth is full!”
_________________4. Every person has a good heart.
_________________5. Rabbits can jump high.

WHAT I HAVE LEARNED

As we have shown above, there are different domains of truth-objective, social and
personal. Each domain of truth has a corresponding justification or has different criteria for
truth. In the scientific/objective domain, truths are tested against empirical evidence. In the
social domain, truths are tested against their acceptability to a group in a particular time in
history. In the personal domain, truths are tested against the consistency and authenticity
of the person who claims them. (Corpuz, Brenda B., et.al. 2016)

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 6

 Lesson
DISTINGUISHING TRUTH AND OPINION
2

WHAT I CAN DO

Activity 1.2. Research Presentation

Directions:
The death penalty is acceptable in some countries while it is forbidden in others. How
do you explain the differences in acceptability of the death penalty? Why do some
groups/cultures allow it while others do not? Research 5 reasons why they accept such. Write
your answers on any clean sheet of paper and label them as Activity 1.2 Research Presentation.

WHAT’S IN

Lesson Motivation

Story Analysis: Plato’s Allegory of the Cave

Imprisonment in the Cave

Plato begins by having Socrates ask Glaucon to imagine a cave where people have
been imprisoned from childhood. These prisoners are chained so that their legs and necks
are fixed, forcing them to gaze at the wall in front of them and not look around at the cave,
each other, or themselves. Behind the prisoners is a fire, and between the fire and the
prisoners is a raised walkway with a low wall, behind which people walk carrying objects or
puppets "of men and other living things". The people walk behind the wall so their bodies
do not cast shadows for the prisoners to see, but the objects they carry do. The prisoners
cannot see any of what is happening behind them, they are only able to see the shadows
cast upon the cave wall in front of them. The sounds of the people talking echo off the walls
and the prisoners believe these sounds come from the shadows.

Socrates suggests that the shadows are a reality for the prisoners because they
have never seen anything else; they do not realize that what they see are shadows of

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 7

objects in front of a fire, much less that these objects are inspired by real things outside the
cave which they do not see.

The fire, or human-made light, and the puppets, used to make shadows are done by
the artists. This can be compared to how illusions are made with light and sound today,
with electronics, videos, movies, and 3D visuals. Plato, however, indicates that fire is also
the political doctrine that is taught in a nation-state. The artists use light and shadows to
teach the dominant doctrines of a time and place.

Also, few humans will ever escape the cave. This is not some easy tasks, and only
a true philosopher, with decades of preparation, would be able to leave the cave, up the
steep incline. Most humans will live at the bottom of the cave, and a small fee will be the
major artists that project the shadows with the use of human-made light.

Departure from the Cave

Plato then supposes that one prisoner is freed. This prisoner would look around and
see the fire. The light would hurt his eyes and make it difficult for him to see the objects
casting the shadows. If he were told that what he is seeing is real instead of the other
version of reality he sees on the wall, he would not believe it. In his pain, Plato continues,
the freed prisoner would turn away and run back to what he is accustomed to (that is, the
shadows of the carried objects). He writes "... it would hurt his eyes, and he would escape
by turning away to the things which he was able to look at, and these he would believe to
be clearer than what was being shown to him."

Plato continues: "Suppose... that someone should drag him... by force, up the rough
ascent, the steep way up, and never stops until he could drag him out into the light of the
sun." The prisoner would be angry and in pain, and this would only worsen when the radiant
light of the sun overwhelms his eyes and blinds him.

"Slowly, his eyes adjust to the light of the sun. First, he can only see shadows.
Gradually he can see the reflections of people and things in water and then later see the
people and things themselves. Eventually, he is able to look at the stars and moon at night
until finally, he can look upon the sun itself." Only after he can look straight at the sun "is
he able to reason about it" and what it is.

Return to the Cave

Plato continues, saying that the freed prisoner would think that the world outside the
cave was superior to the world he experienced in the cave and attempt to share this with

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 8

the prisoners remaining in the cave attempting to bring them onto the journey he had just
endured; "he would bless himself for the change, and pity [the other prisoners]" and would
want to bring his fellow cave dwellers out of the cave and into the sunlight.

The returning prisoner, whose eyes have become accustomed to the sunlight, would
be blind when he re-enters the cave, just as he was when he was first exposed to the
sun. The prisoners, according to Plato, would infer from the returning man's blindness that
the journey out of the cave had harmed him and that they should not undertake a similar
journey. Plato concludes that the prisoners if they were able, would therefore reach out and
kill anyone who attempted to drag them out of the cave.

Symbolism
The allegory contains many forms of symbolism used to instruct the reader in the
nature of perception. The cave represents superficial physical reality. It also represents
ignorance, as those in the cave live accepting what they see at face value. Ignorance is
further represented by the darkness that engulfs them because they cannot know the true
objects that form the shadows, leading them to believe the shadows are the true forms of
the objects. The chains that prevent the prisoners from leaving the cave represent that they
are trapped in ignorance, as the chains are stopping them from learning the truth. The
shadows cast on the walls of the cave represent the superficial truth, which is the illusion
that the prisoners see in the cave. The freed prisoner represents those who understand
that the physical world is only a shadow of the truth, and the sun that is glaring in the eyes
of the prisoners represents the higher truth of ideas. The light further represents wisdom,
as even the paltry light that makes it into the cave allows the prisoners to know shapes.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave
Things to ponder:
How is Plato’s Allegory of the Cave related to real life?

WHAT IS IT

Lesson Discussion

A. TRUTH AND OPINION

Apart from being aware of the different ways of understanding the truth as we have
shown in our previous lesson, it is equally important to learn how to distinguish truth from
opinion. Now, this is a trickier thing. An opinion is a statement of a judgment of a person
about something in the world. Not all opinions, however, are made equal. Opinions are

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 9

statements of judgment that are in need of further justification. If they do not pass the
tests of justification, opinions will have to be defended with better reasons to strengthen
them. An opinion can only become truth if there are enough supporting reasons that defend
it from criticisms.

B. PREMISE AND CLAIM

In order to critically examine opinions, we need to clarify what an argument is. An

argument is a group of statements that serve to support a conclusion. So if someone says,

“There is no hope in the Philippine government.”

This is not yet an argument. It is an expression of opinion. If the person wants to

convince another person that his opinion is true, then he must provide reasons to support
this claim. So an argument would look like this.

“There is no hope in the Philippine government because many officials are corrupt,
and Filipino voters continue to elect them.”

Here, the person is claiming that there is no hope in the Philippine government. He
supports this claim by providing two reasons: a) government officials are corrupt; b) Filipino
voters continue to elect them.

This is what an argument basically looks like. It is composed of a claim (the

conclusion of an argument) and premises (the reasons used to support the conclusion).

WHAT’S MORE

Activity 2.1: Agree or Disagree

Directions:
Do you agree with the following statements? Why or why not? Explain your answers on
any clean sheet of paper. Label it as activity 2.1 Agree or Disagree.

• In order for a Filipino to become financially successful, he/she should go abroad

because the grass is far greener there than in the Philippines.
• Given the numerous benefits that a public teacher has, there is no need to
increase their salary.
• The youth is not the hope of our future anymore because of their degrading values
and disciplines.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 10

 WHAT I HAVE LEARNED

What we always perceive may always not be the truth. Based on the allegory of the
cave by Plato, our perspective changes from time to time when we are exposed to the truth.
In the chase of truth, we need to be critical. We need to separate truth and opinion through
the test of justification. We need to have valid grounds in our arguments. (Corpuz, Brenda
B., et.al. 2016)

WHAT I CAN DO

Activity 2.2: Determining Fake News

Directions: Recall an instance when you have read fake news. How did you know that it is
fake news? What are the premises and what is the claim? Share it on any clean sheet of
paper.

Lesson
FALLACIES AND ARGUMENTS
3

WHAT’S IN

Lesson Motivation
Recall a memory of an argument that you have that you consider not worth having
an argument with. Why do you think it was not worth having an argument with?

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 11

 WHAT IS IT

FALLACIES AND TYPES OF FALLACIES

We have shown that in order for an opinion to gain the status of truth, it must be able
to pass the test of justification. In other words, whoever makes the opinion must be able to
argue for it in the most reasonable way. A philosophical mind must then be prepared to
examine arguments supporting an opinion.

Fallacies, however, can be trickier. They usually come in the guise of well-articulated
arguments. Here are some of the most common ones.

1. Argumentum ad Hominem (Argument against the person)

This is the fallacy used when people convince others that someone’s argument
should be rejected because of the person’s personal background – his history, nationality,
race, socio-economic status, family, associations, religion, and other circumstances. This
argument is considered fallacious because the rightness or wrongness of a claim should
not be affected by the background of the person claiming it.

An example of this can be seen in our culture of victim-blaming when it comes to

rape and sexual harassment. A student goes to the guidance office to report that she has
been sexually harassed. She argues of course that this is a violation of her basic right to
respect and dignity. Unfortunately, many people respond to this argument by first asking,
“What were you wearing when the incident happened, anyway?” This question, if stated in
an argument, would go as follow: “If you were wearing something revealing too much skin,
then the person who violated you should not be blamed. You have no right to argue against
the violation of your dignity if you were carrying yourself like a slut.”

Why is this argument fallacious/? It is a false argument because it seeks to blur the
wrongness of the act of sexual harassment by focusing on the personality, gender, and
other circumstances of the victim. The violation of the right to dignity and respect is
fundamental. It does not change regardless of the personalities of those involved. If
someone was ‘tempted’, the burden of the blame should be put on the person who let his
animality rule over his reason.

The important thing to note here is that we must be wary of arguments that focus on
the personality of the opponent. There is a high chance that most of these arguments are
irrelevant to the issue.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 12

 2. Argumentum ad Baculum (Appeal to force)

This is an argument used by people who want to win a conflict by issuing threats to
their opponents. For example, a student raises a critical question against his history teacher
who must have taught them an erroneous reading of a historical event. The teacher gets
upset with the question and insists that there is nothing wrong with what he taught, and
subtly insinuates that if students would question him further then the whole class will be
getting a harder final exam.

Why is this argument fallacious? It is problematic because instead of convincing the

other person that you are right by giving good reasons, you force them to accept whatever
you say. The listener is made to say ‘yes’ to your claim even if in their right minds they know
that your argument is foolish.

3. Argumentum ad misericordiam (Appeal to pity)

This fallacy is also called an appeal to emotion. It is an argument used by people

who want to win people over by manipulating their emotions. This is a favorite tactic of
politicians during campaign periods. For example, candidate A who has been reported to
be involved in massive corruption of public funds would pay high rates of advertisement
in the media portraying him as a poor and suffering man.

Why is this wrong? People should vote for politicians because of their merits and
capability to serve the public. When people exercise their right to vote, it is because they
understand themselves as mature and rational to choose for themselves what is good for
them. Manipulating people’s emotions cloud voter’s judgment.

4. Argumentum ad Populum (Bandwagon fallacy)

This fallacious argument is a favorite marketing strategy by advertising agencies. It

is used by appealing to the popular sentiment of the public. If they want their product to
sell, they will get the most popular personalities to model their product. This results in fans
and avid followers of those personalities buying the product.

For example, a pharmaceutical company claims that its product is more effective
than other brands through the endorsement of Actor A. Because it is this actor who
endorses it, many will think that this is a good product indeed. Why is this argument
erroneous? Obviously, the effectiveness of a product does not depend on the popularity
of the person endorsing it. It should be drawn through a validated report of testimonies of
a significant number of people who have indeed used it. But the people are not critical
enough when they buy this product. They even argue that the reason why this medicine
is more expensive because it contains high-quality ingredients. In most cases, however,
it is more expensive because of the high costs of advertisement such as the talent fee of
the celebrity endorser.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 13

 It’s important to remember then that popularity does not equate with validity, or that
just because many people believe something to be true, the argument or opinion is
indeed true. As we have shown above in the social domain of truth, an opinion becomes
a true norm only if it has gone through a deliberative process of agreement among those
affected by it. Opinions defended through appeal to popularity do not always pass
through legitimate tests of justification.

5. Hasty Generalization

One commits errors if one reaches an inductive generalization based on

insufficient evidence. The fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the
statistics of a survey of a small group that falls to sufficiently represent the whole
population. General statements made with insufficient evidence to prove the validity of
the statement.

WHAT I HAVE LEARNED

Opinions are statements of a judgment of a person about something in the world.

We should not take them immediately as true. We should always critically examine the
opinion and its supporting arguments. We should also be wary of strongly put arguments
but deep introspection is actually fallacious. To be able to hold credence, opinions should
pass further justification. (Corpuz, Brenda B., et.al. 2016)

WHAT I CAN DO

Activity 3.1: Fallacies

Directions: Read news of a current controversial issue. Ask for the people around you to
comment on that certain issue. Describe their arguments about it.

Looking at the arguments you focused on, how would you assess the strength and
soundness of their arguments? Are the arguments reasonable to you? Do you agree with
these arguments? Do you think some arguments are downright foolish or simply wrong?
What is your criterion for saying that this argument is a good one, and that argument is
bad? Write your answers on any clean sheet of paper.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 14

 Lesson
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
4

WHAT’S IN

Lesson Motivation
Try to philosophize an answer to the question, “Eskimos are very good hunters,
but they never hunt penguins. Why not?”

WHAT IS IT

Lesson Discussion
A. SOCRATIC METHOD

The Socratic method is named after Greek philosopher Socrates who taught
students by asking question after question. Socrates sought to expose contradictions in the
students’ thoughts and ideas to then guide them to solid, tenable conclusions. A Socratic
method is a form of a cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on
asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and
underlying presuppositions

B. DIALECTIC METHOD

The dialectical method is at base a discourse between two or more people holding
different points of view about a subject but wishing to establish
the truth through reasoned methods of argumentation. Dialectic resembles debate.
I care about my brother and think he's great, AND him being hard to reach is
something I don't like about him. This is a dialectical situation. These two, seemingly
opposing facts about the way I feel about my brother, are both true at the same time.

C. LOGICAL THINKING AND CRITICAL THINKING METHOD

Logic is centered on the analysis and construction of arguments. Logical and critical
thinking serve as paths to freedom from half-truths and deceptions. Critical thinking is

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 15

distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings. In making rational choices, first, we
suspend beliefs and judgment until all facts have been gathered and considered.

In general, there are two basic types of reasoning: deductive and inductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is based on observations in order to generalize. This reasoning is often
applied in prediction, forecasting, or behavior. Deductive reasoning draws conclusions from
usually one broad judgment or definition and one more specific assertion, often an
inference. Take for Instance: All philosophers are wise. Confucius is a philosopher.
Therefore, Confucius is wise.

WHAT I HAVE LEARNED

Philosophizing is to think or express oneself in a philosophical manner. It considers

or discusses a (matter) from a philosophical standpoint. The journey of philosophizing is a
very personal journey. There is no specific method to follow. Whatever glimpse of the truth
we get will always be partial and different from others because we all look at truth differently
and use different approaches to arriving at truth. No one has the final answer to everything.
That is why it is important that we constantly engage others to help us examine and reflect
on these truths that we hold. (Ramos, Christine Carmela R. 2016)

WHAT I CAN DO

Activity 4.1: Your Own Philosophical Quest

The Philippines is the only country in the world that denies divorce to the majority of its
citizens. It is the last holdout among a group of staunchly Catholic countries where the
church has fought hard to enforce its views on the sanctity of marriage. What is your stand
on this issue? Explain it on a separate sheet of paper.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 16

 SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT

I. WRITTEN TEST: CREATIVE CONSTRUCTED RESPONSE TEST ITEM

LEARNING COMPETENCY:

1. Distinguish opinion from truth.

2. Realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth.

QUESTION AND CREATIVE WRITTEN OUTPUT:

Answer the following questions below in 5 to 8 sentences for each question.

1. What is the essence of the Anti-Terror Law? What are the facts about the Law?
2. Do you agree with the passing of the Law? Why or why not?

SAMPLE PROMPTS/OUTLINE
1. Assess the strength and soundness of the statement of Rep. Lucy Torres-Gomez on
the controversial issue of Anti-Terror Law.
2. Present two good points and two bad points if there are any.
3. Support your answers with facts and citations.
4. State if you agree with the passing of the Anti-Terror Law or not with an explanation.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 17

STUDENT’S WRITTEN OUTPUT:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

CREATIVE CONSTRUCTED RESPONSE HOLISTIC RUBRIC

Traits 4 3 2 1

Focus & There is one clear, There is one clear, There is one topic. The topic and main
Details well-focused topic. well-focused topic. The main ideas are ideas are not clear.
The main ideas are The main ideas are somewhat clear.
clear and are well clear but are not well
supported by supported by
detailed and detailed information.
accurate
information.

Organization The introduction is The introduction The introduction There is no clear

inviting, states the states the main topic states the main topic. introduction,
main topic, and and provides an A conclusion is structure, or
provides an overview of the included. conclusion.
overview of the paper. A conclusion
paper. Information is is included.
relevant and
presented in a
logical order. The
conclusion is strong.

Voice The author’s The author’s The author’s The author’s

purpose of writing is purpose of writing is purpose of writing is purpose of writing is
very clear, and there clear, and there is somewhat clear, unclear.
is strong evidence of some evidence of and there is
attention to the attention to the evidence of
audience. The audience. The attention to the
author’s extensive author’s knowledge audience. The
knowledge and/or and/or experience author’s knowledge
experience with the with the topic is/are and/or experience
topic is/are evident. evident. with the topic is/are
limited.

Word The author uses The author uses The author uses The writer uses a
Choice vivid words and vivid words and words that limited vocabulary.
phrases. The choice phrases. The choice communicate clearly, Jargon or clichés
and placement of and placement of but the writing lacks may be present and
words seem words are inaccurate variety. detract from the
accurate, natural, at times and/or seem meaning.
and not forced. overdone.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 18

Sentence All sentences are Most sentences are Most sentences are Sentence’s sound
Structure, well constructed and well constructed and well constructed, but
have varied structure have varied they have a similar awkward, are
Grammar,
Mechanics, and length. The structure and length. structure and/or distractingly
& author makes no The author makes a length. The author repetitive,
Spelling errors in grammar, few errors in makes several errors
mechanics, and/or grammar, in grammar, or are difficult to
spelling. mechanics, and/or mechanics, and/or understand. The
spelling, but they do spelling that interfere author makes
not interfere with with understanding. numerous errors in
understanding. grammar,
mechanics,
and/or spelling
that interferes
with
understanding.

II. PERFORMANCE TASK

Most Essential Learning Competency:
Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the methods of philosophizing.

SITUATION:

You are a comic strip creator and you want to create a comic strip out of fallacies.
In order to do that, you have to create a comic strip based on one of the fallacies
discussed. Below the comic strip is the explanation of how it is considered a
fallacious argument by evaluating the truth behind the fallacy and identifying the
personal opinion in it.
GOAL:
To create a comic strip.

STANDARDS:
A comic strip creator.

ROLE:
A comic strip creator.
PRODUCT:
Comic Strip

AUDIENCE:
Readers of all ages
STANDARDS:

The comic strip will be based on the accuracy of the content, organization of ideas, and
conclusions, sources, and grammar, sentence structure, creativity, and design.

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 19

Additional Instruction:
For Online Class: students may use https://www.pixton.com/ in creating a comic strip.
For Modular Class: students may draw in any clean sheet of paper.

PERFORMANCE TASK RUBRICS

4
3 2 1
OUTSTANDIN
CRITERIA SATISFACTORY DEVELOPING BEGINNING RATING
G

The topic of the The topic of the The topic of the The topic of the
comic strip is comic strip is comic strip is a comic strip is
specific in intended to little broad to unclear or
Topic nature and is inform the allow the lacking.
intended to viewers. viewer to
inform the understand the
viewers. main points.
All facts are Almost all facts Some facts are Most facts are
Accuracy of
reported are reported reported reported
the Content
accurately. accurately. accurately. inaccurately.
All ideas and Most of the Some of the No ideas or
pictures used ideas and ideas and pictures are
are well- pictures used pictures used included or
organized and are organized are somehow none of the
Organization appropriate for and organized. ideas or
the content appropriate for Some may not pictures are
displayed. the content be appropriate appropriate for
displayed. for the content the content
displayed. displayed.
All sources All sources Most of the Many sources
used for facts used for facts sources used used for facts
are credible are credible for facts are are less than
Sources
and cited and most are credible and credible and
correctly. cited correctly. most are cited most are not
correctly. cited correctly.
Additional Additional Additional No additional
elements such elements are elements are elements are
as pictures or used but do not included but used.
Creativity maps are enhance the are not relevant
incorporated to infographic. to the topic of
enhance the the infographic.
infographic.
Total:

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 20

 Answer Key

Activity 1.1
1. Personal Domain
2. Objective
3. Social
4. Personal
5. Objective
Activity 1.2 – answers may vary
Activity 2.1 – answers may vary
Activity 2.2 – answers may vary
Activity 3.1 – answers may vary
Activity 4.1 – answers may vary

References:

Books
• Corpuz, Brenda B., et.al. 2016. Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. Manila.
Lori Mar Productions
• Ramos, Christine Carmela R. 2016. Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person.
Manila. Rex Bookstore

For inquiries or feedback, please write or call:

Department of Education – Schools Division of Laoag City

Curriculum Implementation Division
Brgy. 23 San Matias, Laoag City, 2900
Contact Number: (077)-771-3678
Email Address: laoag.city@deped.gov.ph

WBLS-OBE MELC-Aligned Self-Learning Module Intro to Philosophy 11/12 21