Abstract
For the most part, in the Philippines, Philosophy is taught as one of the general education courses in colleges and universities, and usually focuses on fields such as philosophy of man, ethics, or logic. In light of the recent developments in the government’s K to 12 Program, Philosophy will now be taught at the senior high school level. However, I believe that this is not enough. In order for Filipinos to evolve into critical thinkers, Philosophy should be introduced as a staple part of the basic education curriculum as early as elementary school. In this paper, I will argue that Philosophy should be taught to students at an early age in the Philippines for three reasons: 1) the study of Philosophy greatly enhances a student’s critical thinking skills; 2) it opens the person to ideas outside his/her socio-cultural and religious milieu; and 3) it prepares the individual to be a more critical and analytical member of society. Finally, I will argue that it is in the nation’s best interest to incorporate Philosophy into the country’s basic education program since it can significantly help in nation-building.
Keywords
Introduction
I would like to begin this paper with a bold declaration that the socio-political, economic, and moral crises that we are facing in the Philippines today are due to the lack of training in philosophy by the Filipino people. By philosophy, I mean the discipline that inculcates in the student a penchant for asking analytical questions, the habit of evaluating claims, and the realization that the goods of the mind are as equally important as the goods of the body.
A quick review of the Philippines’ recent history, political accomplishments, and current affairs will show how regressive the state of progress in our nation is. We are being led by people who are presumably smart and educated, yet we are in a similar state as we were when martial law was lifted in 1986, or, perhaps, even far worse. We admit to ourselves that many of our elected leaders have continually failed in directing us towards real progress and improving our standards of living. We are aware that we elect leaders on the basis of popularity, not on quality, ideals, or moral ascendancy. We proudly claim that we are a nation that upholds democracy, yet some people abuse this very democracy for their own vested interests. The ancient Greeks, the inventors of democracy, knew very well that in order for democracy to work, the people must be educated.
If we look at the education framework of the country after our liberation from the Japanese, the war had caused a breakdown in Filipino social values, and the public school system that the Americans helped to establish was in crisis (Durban and Catalan, 2012). There were efforts to strengthen the education system of the country, especially during the “brain drain” in the 1950s and 1960s, but these efforts, coupled with the rise of student activism, as well as the implementation of martial law, were insufficient to resolve with finality the shortcomings of Philippine education (Durban and Catalan, 2012).
Even the post-martial law innovations, such as the establishment of the Department of Education, Culture, and Sport, which later became the Department of Education, the founding of the Commission on Higher Education, and the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority to facilitate the quality of education in the Philippines, proved wanting. A proof of this is that in a 1998 study presented by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) more than a decade later, results of a comprehensive appraisal of the Philippines education system revealed that a great deal was desired as far as the quality of education was concerned. There was a need for students to develop higher critical, logical thinking skills, communication skills, values development and/or general manual skills for higher education or the world of work. (Mariñas and Ditapat, 1998: 118)
Thus, despite all our efforts to educate our citizens, we have ended up where we are right now – not far from where we started. Could it be that the reason for this is our failure to educate our people in the discipline of Philosophy? Philosophy looks at education as education in thinking, whereas the Philippine basic education framework is strongly oriented towards the descriptive sciences and skills training (ICEF, 2013). The K to 12 Program is a clear indicator that the priority of our government is to train students to become laborers, not thinkers, visionaries, or reformers (Reyes, 2015).
In the succeeding discussions, I will argue that teaching Philosophy in basic education – that is, beginning from the first grade and not only in senior high school – is a better way of doing Philosophy in the Philippines and is a more responsive approach to facing the 21st-century socio-political, economic, and moral crises of our time for three reasons: 1) the study of Philosophy greatly enhances a student’s critical thinking skills; 2) it opens the person to ideas outside his/her socio-cultural and religious milieu; and 3) it prepares the individual to be a more critical and analytical member of society, while maintaining, at the same time, that it is in the nation’s best interest to incorporate Philosophy into the Philippine basic education program.
The Philippine basic education terrain in light of the K to 12 Program
According to the Department of Education’s list of senior high school core curriculum subjects, Philosophy, as a subject, shall be taught in Grade 12 and shall focus on the philosophy of the human person. Albeit, the importance of this field cannot be overlooked, it is a fact that the effective understanding of this subject requires more than a fundamental awareness of the basic concepts, skills, and principles in philosophy. In my opinion, most Filipinos have little or virtually no appreciation of academic philosophy because most of us only encounter academic philosophy during the one or two brief semesters in college where students are required to take a course on the subject.
I would like to make it clear from the onset that philosophy does not have the monopoly on critical thinking. Nonetheless, in comparison to other disciplines, I believe that none of them offer opportunities to develop one’s critical thinking skills – within a classroom setting – with as much breadth and depth as philosophy. Yet, as it is, philosophy is a difficult field of study. How will, then, it be possible for students to fully understand philosophical ideas and, at the same time, have the opportunity to apply them in their daily lives in a matter of two semesters?
Furthermore, according to the Department of Education (2013), under the K to 12 Curriculum, from Grades 1 to 10, the subjects that are taught in basic education cover the Mother Tongue (student’s native dialect or language), Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies), Art, Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (Home Economics), and Technology and Livelihood Education, Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (Values Education), English, Filipino, Health, Mathematics, Music, Physical Education, and Science. Meanwhile, the senior high school core curriculum subjects are as follows:
Oral Communication Reading and Writing Komunikasyon at Pananaliksik sa Wika at Kulturang Filipino (Communication and Research in the Filipino Language and Culture) Pagbasa at Pagsusuri ng Iba’t Ibang Teksto Tungo sa Pananaliksik (Reading and Analysis of Selected Texts for Research) 21st-Century Literature from the Philippines and the World Contemporary Philippine Arts from the Regions Media and Information Literacy General Mathematics Statistics and Probability Earth and Life Science Physical Science Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person Physical Education and Health Personal Development Understanding Culture, Society, and Politics Earth Science (taken instead of Earth and Life Science for those in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics or STEM Strand) Disaster Readiness and Risk Reduction (taken instead of Physical Science for those in STEM Strand)
It is fairly evident that among these aforementioned subjects, none of them extensively focus on the study of critical thinking compared to philosophy. It can be observed further that in comparison to other subjects that are included in the senior high school core curriculum, there is no subject from Grades 1 to 10 that could possibly provide any form of preparatory lessons for the subject “Introduction to Philosophy of the Human Person”. Although it may be argued that the subject Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao is founded on basic philosophical ideas; however, the content of the entire course is focused on Ethics and Career Guidance. Despite the subject being an introductory course, Philosophy of the Human Person would have to assume that the student should, at least, have a working idea on the various concepts, skills, and principles that are employed in the course, especially on metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics whose respective notions are replete in any discussion on the subject. It is a big question whether or not Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao would be able to provide the metaphysical and epistemological foundations for the study of the Philosophy of the Human Person, as well as whether or not the discussions on ethics in the former will be sufficient preparation for the demands of the latter subject.
Perhaps it is not a far-fetched claim that most of the subjects that will be taught in basic education aim to impart knowledge. For most intents and purposes, this is good and, for the most part, beneficial, but we must also take into consideration the fact that “although our age far surpasses all previous ages in knowledge, there has been no correlative increase in wisdom” (Russell, 2009: 13), wherein Russell defines “wisdom” in terms of comprehensive vision and emancipation from the tyranny of custom.
As comprehensiveness, wisdom entails looking at things sub specie aeternitatis, wherein to view things under the aspect of eternity compels us to look at the lessons of the past, the needs of the present, and the consequences for the future, before forming a judgment and acting on it. Meanwhile, as emancipation, wisdom entails freeing ourselves from the chains of our prejudices, wherein this freedom compels us to consider things from a perspective of reasonableness rather than one that is personal and partial. Whereas information and knowledge give us descriptions of what are in the world and how they can be of use to us, wisdom enables us to look at those that are with greater meaning and purpose, not merely in the sense of utility, but in the sense of understanding the self through the appreciation of the not-self. This is vital in any society because through one’s understanding of one’s self, s/he will be able to decide what kind of society – what kind of world – s/he wants to live in. Thus, even if we obtain all the knowledge and information there is about the world, this does not imply that we can create a well-ordered society without wisdom. And it is, precisely, the niche of philosophy to enrich all of this knowledge and information with wisdom. Science, philosophy, and literature are all disciplines which humanistic values can be extracted and formulated as recommendations for practice. But literature is too diffuse and diversified to serve as primary aegis for thinking instruction, and science is too narrow and unified. Philosophy, with its tough insistence on logical rigor and its emphasis on flexibility, is a much more likely candidate. (Lipman, 2003: 69)
Towards the forging of stronger building blocks for a better nation
One of the most important contributions of the ancient Greeks to the world is democracy. However, as mentioned earlier, democracy can only work effectively if the nation’s citizens are highly educated. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle are historical testimonies to this proposition. They endeavoured to educate their fellow Greeks because they knew that education is the key to a truly democratic society.
However, apart from this, there are many other things that we can derive from philosophy. It is worth mentioning that utility is the least among the concerns of philosophy, yet philosophy seems to be useful in addressing the demands of today’s globalized world. People who have earned a degree in Philosophy as well as those who have a substantial background in the subject are found to be influential in diverse fields including technology, business, law, and medicine, among others. “Famous former philosophy majors include filmmaker Woody Allen, actor Harrison Ford, billionaire financier George Soros, economist Herbert Simon, conservative pundit Pat Buchanan, NFL quarterback John Elway, novelist Iris Murdoch, and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr” (Anwar, 2011: par. 15).
In the area of business, Gregoire enumerates the following reasons why students of philosophy will become instrumental in shaping the business world:
Philosophy develops strong critical thinking skills and business instincts. Former philosophy students have gone on to make waves in the tech world. Philosophers (amateur and professional) will be the ones to grapple with the biggest issues facing their generation. Philosophy students are “citizens of the world” (see Gregoire, 2014: par. 9–26).
In the past years, many international news outlets have featured the importance and necessity of studying Philosophy in our world today (see Esposito, 2015; Grant, 2014; Gregoire, 2014; Shammas, 2012; Sowey, 2013). This just goes to show that the study of Philosophy is as relevant now as it has always been.
Nevertheless, we cannot deny the fact that the success of Philosophy (or any educational discipline) in developing critical and analytic thinkers depends significantly on how it was taught. Merely lecturing on concepts and theories and expecting students to memorize and write them as answers to exam questions do not produce the kind of thinkers that we are aiming for. If we assume that the purpose of education is not only to transmit a body of knowledge but also to equip children with the skills and dispositions they need to create new knowledge and make better practical judgments, then the traditional classroom of “telling” is not appropriate. (Sharp, 1991: 34) [W]e will not be able to get students to engage in better thinking unless we teach them to employ criteria and standards by means of which they can assess their thinking for themselves. I do not see this coming about through teaching about critical thinking as it is now understood and practiced. (Lipman, 2003: 75)
When a student is subjected to the “culture” of philosophical thinking, a number of behaviours that are indicative of critical and analytic thinking manifest. There are cognitive behaviors that can be observed: giving and asking for good reasons, making good distinctions and connections, making valid inferences, hypothesizing, generalizing, giving counter-examples, discovering assumptions, using and recognizing criteria, asking good questions, inferring consequences, recognizing logical fallacies, calling for relevance, defining concepts, seeking clarification, voicing implications, perceiving relationships, judging well, standardizing, using good analogies, sensitivity to context, offering alternative points of view, building logically on contributions of others and voicing fine discriminations. (Sharp, 1991: 31–32)
Given the relevance of the training provided by Philosophy, it is not difficult to arrive at the realization that if we want our citizens to be critical thinkers, then it is our obligation to train them in the discipline of philosophy while they are still young. Philosophy has always been preoccupied with good thinking, logic being one of its oldest branches. While formal logic is beyond the ken of young children, they are very capable of the informal logical operations that constitute basic reasoning, including giving reasons, considering evidence, agreeing and disagreeing, giving examples and counterexamples, and making comparisons and distinctions … Reasoning, as just described, is one important method. Another is attempting to discover a wide range of ideas and points of view relevant to the question under consideration, so that our judgments will be well-informed as well as well-reasoned. (PLATO, 2009: par. 7) The essential contribution of the Philosophy for Children program is the thesis that thinking is the essence of education, that to improve the quality of thinking is the purpose of education. This quality of thinking is shown in the quality of judgments, in professional and civic life, in how citizens relate with one another, and in the quality of collective decisions as well. When the quality of judgment has reached this point, it can be said that thinking has become the essence of education and the Philosophy for Children program is working. (Lee, 2014: 76) There is evidence that P4C had a positive impact on Key Stage 2 (Maths, Reading, and Writing) attainment. Overall, pupils using the approach made approximately two additional months’ progress on reading and maths. Results suggest that P4C had the biggest positive impact on Key Stage 2 results among disadvantaged pupils (those eligible for free school meals). Analyses of the Cognitive Abilities Test (a different outcome measure not explicitly focused on attainment) found a smaller positive impact. Moreover, in terms of this outcome it appears as though disadvantaged pupils reaped fewer benefits from P4C than other pupils. It is unclear from the evaluation why there are these differences between the two outcomes. Teachers reported that the overall success of the intervention depended on incorporating P4C into the timetable on a regular basis. Otherwise there was a risk that the programme would be crowded out. Teachers and pupils generally reported that P4C had a positive influence on wider outcomes such as pupils’ confidence to speak, listening skills, and self-esteem. These and other broader outcomes are the focus of a separate evaluation by the University of Durham.
Essentially, the study of philosophy trains students to be analytical, attentive, and critical of ideas presented to them, and at the same time educates them in expressing their opinions in a clear, precise, and consistent way both in verbal and written forms – skills which are very in demand in the business world, here and abroad. The Greek word for the “love of wisdom,” philosophy raises questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, the mind and language. The rigorous training that philosophy majors undergo to grasp epistemology, metaphysics and axiology and to employ critical thinking ranks them among the highest scorers on verbal and analytical tests for admission to graduate school. In addition to examining the ideas that have shaped the history of civilization, philosophy scholars study evidence, argumentation and how to make ethically sound decisions. (Anwar, 2011: par. 14–15)
However, there seems to be deficiencies in this because we have no complete grasp of what the ends of human life ought to be. This is reflected in our treatment of education. Most of us, including our political leaders, view education as a means rather than an end in itself. In fact, in Republic Act 10533 or the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, it was explicitly stated that “the State shall create a functional basic education system that will develop productive and responsible citizens equipped with the essential competencies, skills and values for both life-long learning and employment” (Republic Act no. 10533, 2013: sec. 2, par. 3). For this reason, philosophy is also seen as outdated because of its lack of practical worth or employment value. “This view of philosophy appears to result, partly from a wrong conception of the ends of life, partly from a wrong conception of the kind of goods which philosophy strives to achieve” (Russell, 1946: 153).
Many people spend at least 10–15 years of their lives studying with the hopes of landing a high-paying job once they graduate. There are also people who pursue courses that are outside of their interests just because they are after jobs that are in demand. Some stick to jobs that they hate because it pays well while others are forced to latch on to jobs that are totally unrelated to the degree that they earned; that is, if they are fortunate enough to even be employed. This kind of outlook on the ends of life contributes to making life appear quite meaningless.
Meanwhile, studying philosophy helps us to take into account various possible considerations about the ends of human life. Socrates talks about knowledge and virtue, Aristotle argues for happiness, while Bentham thinks it is pleasure, among others. We can observe that none of these philosophers consider wealth, money, fame, or glory as ends of human life because the meaning of life is much more than that. Philosophy teaches us to be more human than worldly. As Sowey puts it, “no training has shaped my humanity as deeply as philosophy has” (2013: par. 4).
Indeed, disciplines in the sciences, languages, the arts, and the like help us to accumulate a wide range of knowledge and skills, but it is the responsibility of philosophy to infuse wisdom into the equation. As Russell asserts, the “world needs wisdom as it has never needed it before; and if knowledge continues to increase, the world will need wisdom in the future even more than it does now” (2009: 15). If only we can help the next generations see beyond the veil of the importance of political, economic, and military dominance that the current zeitgeist has imposed upon us through the study of philosophy, then there is hope that the building blocks of our nation will be rebuilt and strengthened by reason and wisdom.
Integrating Philosophy in Philippine basic education
It is one thing to argue that Philosophy should be included in Philippine basic education, however, it is another thing to answer the question, how? Should it be integrated in all subjects or should it be taught as a separate subject? In my view, Philosophy should be taught as a separate subject much like Mathematics, Science, and English. Given the fact that teaching Philosophy, as a subject, requires a certain level of mastery, it is difficult to expect a Mathematics teacher to explore the notions of universals, analytic claims, or metaphysics while teaching students basic mathematical operations such as addition and subtraction; or an English teacher to discuss concepts such as meaning, reference, or philosophy of language while discussing the difference between a noun and a verb. The role of Philosophy, as a discipline that concerns itself with the foundations of things, is to be able to weave together all of the different subjects that the student learns into one coherent whole. This is a difficult feat to accomplish and possibly a teacher cannot do it justice unless one has the sufficient background and training in Philosophy. Thus, through instituting Philosophy as one of the core subjects in basic education, a philosophical appreciation of all the subjects that students learn in a given school year will serve as the adhesive that will hold all of them together, as well as serve as an avenue for philosophical analysis of each of their respective claims.
Given this, the next obvious question is, how will this be introduced? How will this be integrated in the K to 12 curriculum? In terms of law and jurisprudence, I believe that the first step is for a bill to be passed that shall require Philosophy to be taught in Philippine basic education. Once the bill is signed into law, Philosophy will officially be included in the Philippine basic education curriculum. After the legalities, the next step would be to determine what subject will be taught in every grade level before a course syllabus can be formulated for each subject. In this light, I have provided a rough outline of the philosophical subjects that will be taught in every grade level:
Grade 1 – P4C (Level I) Grade 2 – P4C (Level II) Grade 3 – P4C Level III) Grade 4 – P4C (Level IV) Grade 5 – P4C (Level V) Grade 6 – Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Grade 7 – Introduction to Philosophy of Language Grade 8 – Introduction to Epistemology and Metaphysics Grade 9 – Introduction to Logic (Informal and Formal) Grade 10 – Introduction to Philosophy of Education Grade 11 – Introduction to Ethics Grade 12 – Introduction to Social and Political Philosophy
Generally, P4C levels I to V will ease students into the practice of philosophizing. The main objective is to teach students how to think critically, creatively, and caringly – multidimensional thinking – by helping them to bring out and talk about their personal perspectives on the things that they are experiencing and are trying to understand in life. This can be done by transforming the traditional classroom into a community of inquiry that facilitates the development of multidimensional thinking. The idea is for the teacher to facilitate discussions to empower the students to “give birth” to insights, which is basically the essence of the Socratic Method. Here, the teacher is not meant to be seen as a font of knowledge, but as a part of the community of inquirers wherein low-power distance exists between teacher and students in contrast to the high-power distance that may exist in the traditional classroom setup. Since teachers are often see as role models inside the classroom, students would be able to express themselves more freely if the teachers do not rely heavily on the power of their position. Thus, it would certainly be more beneficial to them [students] if they are able to adjust their gestures and language according to the prevailing classroom culture, which, of course, is often largely determined by the teacher’s fundamental view of their role in the teaching-learning continuum. (Muega et al., 2016: 36) In modifying a classroom setting into an environment that could facilitate the development of relevant knowledge and skills that students are expected to acquire and develop, teachers have the power to reverse … cultural practices that may stand in the way of learning. (Muega et al., 2016: 36)
From Grades 1 to 5, the students will be trained to devise their answers from their own reason rather than parroting some ready-made response from textbooks. This will be done through the “community of inquiry” and “collaborative thinking”, which are very central notions in P4C. The community of inquiry is made up of a community of inquirers; that is, learners who are in a place where it is safe to ask questions, critically engage and challenge the ideas of others, explore and understand ideas rather than merely arriving at the “right answer”, and build on the ideas of fellow inquirers. In the community of inquiry, students are encouraged to engage in collaborative thinking; that is, they are encouraged to think together. The difference between the community of inquiry and our present normal classroom setting is that in our classes today, students are often given the “right” answers by teachers rather than allowing them to explore all the possible answers in order for them to generate reasonable answers on their own by analysing and building on the ideas of their classmates through democratic dialogue.
Meanwhile, Philosophy subjects that will be taught from Grade 6 to 12 will be introductory courses on different fields in Philosophy, which are more focused and specialized than those discussed in P4C. It is expected that at this point, the student is already adept in philosophizing. Further, through five years of P4C, the student is expected to have gained the necessary background on the concepts, skills, and principles that will facilitate a more meaningful discussion on each of these fields. The manner by which these subjects are chosen and arranged is based on a variety of interrelated factors such as the student age, readiness to handle the topics in each subject, significant life events such as when students are about to choose the strand that they will pursue in senior high school or when they are about to vote, building up of concepts and ideas beginning from the self (Philosophy of the Human Person) towards the society (Social and Political Philosophy), and how the preceding philosophy subjects are useful in understanding the succeeding philosophy subjects.
In this light, Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person shall be taught in Grade 6. At around the age of 11, students should already be guided to the understanding of their experiences as human beings, to the idea of personhood, freedom, and death, among others. The goal here is for the students to understand the idea of personhood, for through this understanding can they only begin to cultivate respect for themselves and others as persons, as well as for them to realize that despite our mortality there is more meaning to life than worldly pleasures and instant gratifications. The idea here is that the understanding of the self must be the starting point in the students’ quest to appreciate and understand the world in which they are part of. Students may talk about the conceptual differences between a human being and a human person, the purpose of human life, emotions, death, and so forth.
Introduction to Philosophy of Language shall be taught in Grade 7. The aim is to train students to clarify meanings of words and concepts. From understanding the self, students begin to understand the world around them through the use of language. Confusions arise when the intended meaning of words are not clear. In addition, many people are misled into believing an argument or forced to assent to a proposition because they cannot understand the meanings of the words or phrases used and would rather agree with them than appear ignorant by asking. Other “learned” individuals exploit jargons and technicalities to take advantage of those who were not given the chance to finish their studies. Discussions on Philosophy of Language will train students in clarifying words and concepts so as to engage in reasoned and informed arguments. Possible topics include: meaning of words and concepts, definition, translation, language, and reality, among others.
From going through a course that studies the nature of language as a tool used to refer to a lot of things in the world, it is only logical to proceed to a course that would talk about those things that are referred to using language. Thus, Introduction to Epistemology and Metaphysics shall be taught in Grade 8. It is difficult to separate discussions on metaphysics from discussions on epistemology because many of the issues that are tackled in these fields overlap. For instance, the notion of reality in metaphysics cannot be adequately discussed without talking about knowledge and certainty in epistemology. At the high school level, it is expected that students have already been introduced to a lot of information given the lessons that are discussed in class since elementary school as well as ease of access to print, broadcast, and online media. At this point, it is beneficial to lead the students into questioning the claims that they encounter every day in relation to their truth or falsity. In order for students to see beyond appearances and into what is real, it is important for them to learn to evaluate and determine the adequate evidence provided in support of a claim. Thus, students may deal with questions about how we know, how does our knowledge correspond to reality, the notion of truth, the justification of our claims, etc.
Introduction to Logic (Informal and Formal) shall be taught in Grade 9. At the age of 14, students are expected to be capable enough of more complicated analytical processes. It is at this grade level that students will be taught to analyse arguments. Logic will help them to analyse the soundness of knowledge claims, see the truth behind the rhetoric and complexity of language, and effectively distinguish between reality and appearances. Informal logic will deal with day-to-day argumentations. It is a fact that “real-world” arguments are replete with premises that are neither epistemologically nor logically supportive of their conclusions. Aside from insufficiency of evidence or ambiguity in the use of words or phrases, many of the premises are not logically relevant to the conclusion, albeit they are psychologically relevant at most. The task of informal logic is to train the students to weed out irrelevant premises as they engage in reasoned dialogues with their peers and other members of the society. To reinforce this, students will also be trained in formal logic. Whereas informal logic focuses on the content of an argument, formal logic focuses on the argument structure. By understanding the structure of arguments, it will be easier for students to recognize valid arguments from invalid ones.
Introduction to Philosophy of Education shall be taught in Grade 10. At this point in the K to 12 Program, students are at the threshold of choosing a strand that they will pursue when they advance to Grade 11. Discussions on Philosophy of Education are timely to let the students understand that the goal of education is not merely for employment, but, more than this, the goal of education is to develop oneself into becoming a better person who is an important part of nation-building. In this light, the subject will help the students in realizing the worth or value that they are putting in themselves, their capacity as learners, and their potential to become better contributors to nation-building through the “strand of education” that they will choose. At this point, students may talk about the reasons why people should be educated, how people should be educated, and what they think education is all about, among other things.
Introduction to Ethics shall be taught in Grade 11. Discussions on ethics will be easier when students are already trained in questioning the meanings of words, looking for adequate evidence for claims, and recognizing sound arguments. Since ethics is an evaluative concept, discussion on the subject is expected to be problematic. This is problematic in the sense that the student’s notions of right and wrong, good and evil, and is and ought, among others, will be put into question. This requires a certain level of maturity on the part of the students for them to question their own moral beliefs. Ultimately, the aim of this course is to make the students arrive at the realization that proper ethical conduct is not something that is imposed on us by family, religion, or society, but is an important part of producing a well-ordered society. Thus, discussions on intrinsic and instrumental goods, obligations, values, norms, influences of religion, and culture on morals, among others, are expected to be engaged in, at this point, by the students.
Last but not the least, Introduction to Social and Political Philosophy shall be taught in Grade 12. At this juncture, students are merely a year away from exercising their right to suffrage. It is paramount that students become aware of the reality that there are many other options to produce a well-ordered society apart from the choices that are laid out before us right now. Through this, future leaders and voters will be conscious of the “ideal State” that all of us should work together to achieve. In the end, this will serve as the culmination of the Philosophy subjects taught in basic education whose collective main goal is to provide better and stronger building blocks for the development of our nation. Hence, ideas pertaining to justice, freedom, equality, the social contract, the common good, the well-ordered society, and so forth may be discussed here.
Given this outline, Philosophy in basic education is envisioned to reinforce the attempts of the K to 12 Program to develop among students the “capability to engage in autonomous, creative, and critical thinking, and the capacity and willingness to transform others and one’s self” (Republic Act no. 10533, 2013: sec. 2, par. 2). Further, it shall counterbalance the obvious preference of the government to reduce education to a mere tool to secure employment for our prospective graduates by changing their perspective on education as well as by opening their minds to possibilities in the hopes that they will eventually take the initiative to insist and enact change in the different aspects of the Philippine society.
It was raised, however, that some philosophers echo the view of Socrates that philosophy is a way of life (e.g. Foucault, Hadot, Nietzsche, and Nehamas). Indeed, philosophy can contribute to nationhood by creating beautiful lives based on aestheticized lives. Still, in order to arrive at an understanding of what is and what makes up an aestheticized life involves a certain degree of philosophizing. Of course, it is difficult to imagine doing this if we do not know how to philosophize in the first place. Further, when Socrates envisioned philosophy as a way of life he also associated knowledge with virtue; that is, in order for a person to be virtuous, one must have true knowledge. Nonetheless, Socrates also pointed out that one can only acquire true knowledge through the practice of philosophy and, for this reason, he went to the agora of ancient Athens day after day to engage people in philosophical discourse so that they may, hopefully, do it as a habit. It may be important to note at this juncture that in the context of Socrates – the context of Ancient Greece, in general – “virtue” or ethos means “good habit”. From this, it is not difficult to see that “habit” is basically “a way of life” – a way of doing things – and when Socrates argued that philosophy is a way of life, what he meant was that we must engage in philosophy as a habit and that since philosophy helps us to acquire true knowledge, then the practice of philosophy is a good habit, that is, a virtue.
In this sense, it seems that one of the more promising ways in which philosophy can contribute to nationhood by creating beautiful lives based on aestheticized lives is for us to practice philosophy as a habit, which, unfortunately, is not the case at the moment. And how can we develop philosophizing as a habit better than when we start doing it at an early age?
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.