Pantayong pananaw

What is pantayong pananaw?

is defined as a method of acknowledging
the history and development of the nation
based on the internal interconnectedness
and linking of characteristics, values,
knowledge, wisdom, aspirations,
practices,behavior, and experiences as a
unified whole.
● it is a pragmatic discourse developed as
a response to the westernized perspective
of the study of Philippine history and
historiography.

●It was developed by Dr. Zeus Salazar.

Historical Context
Goals:
- To contribute to the talastasang
bayan or national discourse.

- To advocate the use of the

Filipino language in writing history
and understanding society.
KEY CONCEPTS
In UNDERSTANDING
PANTAYONG PANANAW
 KEY CONCEPT
- internal interconnectedness and linking of
characteristics, values, knowledge, wisdom, aspirations,
practices, behavior, and experiences as a unified whole”
— a unity that is framed by and expressed in a single
language; that is, within an autonomous, self-directed
discourse of progress and civilization
 MYTH & HISTORIA
MYTH – refers to traditional HISTORIA – written
storym especially one chronology of past events
concerning the early history
of a people and typically
involves supernatural events
or beings
Bagong kasaysayan
The idea of Bagyong Kasaysayan is a fusion of the
ancient definition of kasaysayan with the scientific
tradition of historia. Indigenous concepts and values
vital to kasaysayan are studied through the use of
scientific method of historia.
In Bagong Kasaysayan, historians focus on non-
traditional themes such as
epidemics,women,environment,and even jokes.
The German Historian Leopold von Ranke
 Who argued that “no
document, no history.” The use
of primary sources, which was
Ranke’s contribution to the
field of historiography, is also
being emphasized, but primary
sources are not confned to
documents alone but to other
sources as well such as
artifacts,fossil, remains,
language, and architecture.
The use of an indigenous perspective is also a
must in Bagong Kasaysayan since it will serve
as the historian’s framework in analyzing
historical facts and propagating nationalist
consciousness. Finally, the use of a national
language is considered beneficial in Bagong
Kasaysayan since it would help in the
promotion of a Filipino perspective in the
writing of history.
DR. ZEUS A. SALAZAR
➡️DR. Zeus A. Salazar
Born Zeus Atayza Salazar

April 20, 1934 (age 86)

Tiwi, Albay, 
Philippine Islands

Nationality Filipino
➡️Education
He went to San Beda College, where he finished his primary
education as valedictorian in 1947, before going to Albay
High School (which will become Bicol State University) for his
secondary education. Salazar then proceeded to enter 
University of the Philippines Diliman where he took up
Bachelor of Arts in History. Graduated in 1955, he was the
first summa cum laude of the history program of UP.
BOOKS OF SALAZAR
This is the three example of his book:
 Honors and award
 Because of his gigantic imprint
in Philippine academia, many
institutions grant him academic
awards and honors. It includes
Chevalier dans l’Ordre des
Palmes Academiques (the
academic highest award given by
the French government).
Strengths
 The strongest and blatantly “nativist” position, which perhaps no one among the PP can consciously
take, is the rigorous exclusion of any terminological/linguistic borrowing. This last position is so
impossible that those who have naively taken it due to some romantic ultra-nationalism are easily and
routinely attacked just by demonstrating how a own utterances and texts are inescapably involved in the
process of linguistic and intellectual change and appropriation. Misunderstandings of Salazar’s position
as strongly nativist have led some critics to charge him with inconsistency to his own principles by
pointing out his borrowed concepts or by tracing his intellectual debts to European influences. Mulder
(2000) even thought that PP implies that “the links with the outside world need to be cut.” In reaction to
such conceptions, Ileto wrote that “the philosophy behind [Salazar’s] pantayong pananaw needs to be
threshed out more. It could be more subtle naman than you portray it….To reduce it to a form of crude
nationalism gets us back to a dead-end sort of discussion” (quoted in Abinales 2000).
 It would be useful to point out here that the use of internal concepts to explain socio-
cultural phenomena does not necessarily entail the use of the language of origin of
these concepts in the exposition itself. A case in point here would be Enriquez’
variant of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (SP) which pursued an emic approach even as the
primary language of transmission tended to be English, especially in his later works
(Enriquez 1994; 1995). This would lead to the assessment (Sta. Maria 1993) that PP
offers a more effective and consistent route to social scientific “indigenization” than
SP. Reynaldo Ileto’s famous Pasyon and Revolution (1979), a work rigorously
organized around emic principles of analysis, also employed English as the
language of exposition. It is therefore sometimes called, though uneasily, a “proto-
pantayo” text.
“CRITICISMS”
 This essay on Pantayong pananaw (PP)aims to provide an introductory glimpse In a
direction that can be considered among the most influential and controversial in the
history of social science in the Philippines The pp began in the late seventies as an
indigenizing movement within a group of historians led by Zeus Salazar at the
University of the Philippines originally developed as a manifestation of the rival pro-
united states tradition and nationalist tradition in Philippine historiography that ruled
the paradigm from the fifties to the seventies the pp has since gradually gained
philosophical and methodological influence in other disciplines in the social sciences
and in humanities as an integral aspect of the culturally centered indigenizing call pp
advocates use Filipino the national language as the main medium Of their writings.
 Comments on PP as "nativist" and "essentialist" will be discussed in part. One
of the main purposes of the essay is to provide the reader with a general,
though not comprehensive, knowledge of the level and complexity of the
current debate revolving around one of the most important “indigenizing”
trends in social science in the Philippines. The PP's attempt to resolve the
radical separation or alienation between the social sciences and the Filipino
"people" by using the national language and creating an alternative field for
dialectical exchange is also being addressed. Finally, the essay presents
suggestions towards formulating what the author assumes is a more helpful
and broader definition of PP as a practice in social science within the Filipino
context.