PANTAYONG PANANAW

OBJECTIVES:
• In this module, you will be able
to:
Explore personal and social
experiences using indigeneous
concepts.
Explain the significance of using
particular language for discourse.
Critique dominant approaches using
Filipino perspective.
• The provided text discusses
the concept of "Pantayong
Pananaw" in the context of
Philippine history and
cultural analysis. Here's a
breakdown of the key
points:
• KEYCONCEPTS
1. Pantayong Pananaw and Pangkami:
• Pantayo: Refers to a self-subsistent
dialogical circle consisting of active
(speaking) subjects. It's a "from-us-for-
us perspective."
• - Pangkami: Denotes a situation
where speakers present themselves as an
"other-directed" collective object under
the gaze of an Other. It's a "from-us-for-
you perspective."
2. Intellectual Leader:
• - Zeus A. Salazar is the
intellectual leader of the
Pantayong Pananaw (PP)
movement in the social
sciences.
3. Development of Pantayong
Pananaw:
• Salazar's doctoral thesis in 1968
contained the basic ideas that later
led to the Pantayong Pananaw.
• - PP emerged as a systematic,
intellectualized variant of the
Filipino language in the 1970s and
1980s
4. Influence and Scholars:

• - Salazar influenced scholars

across disciplines, and many
significant publications and
theses have been produced
under the auspices of PP.
5. Usages of Pantayong
Pananaw:
• Descriptive concept referring to
any social collectivity with a unified
linguistic-cultural structure.
• - Critique of colonial discursive
strategies, discourses of influence,
"First Filipino" discourses, and
reactive discourses.
6. Pantayong Pananaw
Arguments:
• - Emphasizes the need to
reorient historians based on who
is talking for whom, with whom,
and to whom.
• - Identifies three perspectives in
Philippine history: Pangkayo,
Pangkami, and Pantayo.
PERSPECTIVES:
1. Pangkayo Pananaw:
• Used by Western historians framing
Philippine events based on their
cultural background and countries'
agenda.
• - "From-you-for-us" perspective,
where outsiders talk about or reference
a culture, its people, and customs.
2. Pangkami Pananaw:
• - Emerged as local scholars
challenged Western depictions of
the Philippines.
• - "From-us-for-you"
perspective, used by natives
talking to outsiders about their
own society and culture.
3. Pantayo Pananaw:
• - Advocates for Philippine history
to be primarily written and
consumed by Filipinos.
• - "From-us-for-us" perspective,
where communication includes
all Filipinos, excluding outsiders.
Use of Local Language:
• - Salazar argues for writing
Philippine history in the local
language to retain actual meanings
and historical significance.
• - Local language ensures that
history is discussed among
Filipinos, not for others.
Criticisms and
Limitations:
1. Exclusive Use of Filipino:
• - Critics argue against the
exclusive use of Filipino,
suggesting that certain terms
disputed by Salazar were used
by historical figures.
2. Cultural Essentialism:
• - Salazar's focus on cultural
values neglects broader societal
issues such as exploitation and
inequality.
3. Locally Deterministic:
• - Salazar is criticized for
rejecting concepts like Marxism
as Western and not relating to
Filipino values.
4. Impact of Globalization:
• - Pantayong Pananaw doesn't
adequately address the impact
of globalization, leading to a
potential gap in understanding
contemporary Filipino identity.
• In summary, Pantayong Pananaw
is presented as a framework for
reorienting historical
perspectives, emphasizing the
importance of language and
critiquing colonial discourses.
However, criticisms point to
potential limitations and
challenges in its application.
THANK YOU!!!