•
• The values We Live By: The Congruence
and Distribution of values In Academe with
Filipino values and Coals of National Development
Ledlvlna V. Carino
h e University of the
• T Philippines is a community
of scholars serving in an
institution created by the State.
That definition implies certain
values that not only animate and
orient our work, but also affect our
actions as a University and as
individual faculty members and
citizens of this country. In this paper,
• I will first identify the values of the
University qu a university, and their
positive and negative interrelations.
Then I will examine the values we
transmit to students, relating these to
both the value system of the
University and the society, and
showing their continuities and
disjunctions. Next I will present the
values which move us in serving
society and government. I will
• examine how the roles we play there
Philippine Sociological Review Vol. 45, Nos. 1·4 (1997):159-188.
manifest our value commitments
and analyze the problems and
challenges they place before us.
Finally, I will summarize the
emerging elements of a University
ethic. Bu t rather than ending with
the identification of a tight value
system, I will highlight the conflicts
and tensions associated with the
analysis of, and adherence to, these
values. In so doing I hope to show
that the attempt to put values at the
center of the University'S agenda
opens a whole new arena of
discussion and debate, an exciting,
unfinished and long-term business.
The Values We Live By: An Initial
Formulation of a University Ethic
'The values" we live by are the
fundamental norms or non-
159
n e g o tia bl e s of the university Academic Excellence and
•
community, what it cherishes and Associated Values. The Charter
considers of ultimate worth (cf. states the purpose of the University
Reyes, 1989:2-3). They are moral "to give advanced instruction in
or ethical standards signifying what
literature, philosophy, the sciences
are intrinsically desirable, and are
and arts, and to give professional
differentiated from technical normsand technical training." The letter
which refer to means through of the law recognizes an organi-
zation founded on a technical
which the desired state is reached.'
I draw empirical support for calling
norm, the development of cogni-
•
them university ideals from their tive, professional and technical
identification in the Knowledge skills. However, our founders, the
Management, Attitude and Value generations after them, and our
Formation Studies (KAVS) spon- own generation have not been
sored by the. University and satisfied with treating the University
conducted in UP Diliman from 1991 only as a technical institution. All
to 1993 (Doronila and Carino, have sought to ennoble its purpose
1993).2 For this paper, I'have gonewith the development of the
back to the basic documents, i.e., intellect to the fullest. Into the
the University Charter, and the instrumental value stated in our
original sources used by KAVS- Charter we have discovered
primarily the vision 0 f the
University through the eyes of the
"academic excellence." Its pursuit,
using ''the world's standard" was
•
presidents at their inaugurals. begun at the time of the first UP
president, Murray C. Bartlett
The highest ideals have always (1911:10). It has continued all the
moved the University. Even from way to the current presidency, with
so prosaic a document as the Emil Q. Javier reminding us that "to
University Charter (Act No. 1870) be from UP has always meant to
which does not explicitly be 'the best and the brightest";
enshrine any guiding principles, (1994:12). That quest for academic
five major values may readily be excellence, in turn, has placed the •
inferred: academic excellence, University in the service 0 f reason,
social justice and equality, guided by objectivity and the
nationalism; public service and' unceasing search for truth. It has
social responsibility, and also breathed soul into the
democratic governance. In University, as it is inspired by "the
pursuing them, other values have creation and cultivation of the spirit
been evoked which are related to of discovery" (Since, 1958:14). S.P.
them as means or as coequal Lopez described the interactive role
ends. offaculty and students in pursuing
•
160
• this intellectual and spiritual ideal
in this way:
The University is a single
indivisible community of
scholars ... joindy engaged in
the search for goodness, truth
and beauty... The academic
• effort is... a communal one,
and professors and students
have a common stake in
enhancing the academic
excellence of the university
(1969:3) .
Being the bearer of academic
excellence, the University seeks to
be "a great institution which
should crown the public school
system" (Villamor, 1915:2) and "the
measuring stick of our educational
• system" (Tan, 1952:2). Carlos P.
Romulo was more expansive:
I shall stand with you ... in the
emergence of a great
university in this coun try, the
best university' for the
Filipino, a center for learning
for all Southeast Asia, and a
• worthy member of the roster
ofworld universities (1963:3).
Academic excellence as a value
cannot be attained if one is
shackled. Thus, academic freedom
is a sine qua non for excellence and
the search for the truth; it must not
just be protected but hallowed. In
Carlos P. Romulo's terms:
••
Since higher education is an
unfolding process at all levels
of academic life, it is
axiomatic that restraint from
any source ... is an alien and
repugnant thing to be
banished, not so much by
reaction, which is negative
and defeatist, but by the
active exercise of freedom .
... I propose therefore to go
beyond protecting it, but
actively to espouse its positive
and constructive expression ...
It is better for the university
to be slightly on the side of
excess than on the side of
suppression ... if the spirit of
free inquiry is to prevail and
not to disappear forever
(1963:15).
Academic excellence as "the
development of the highest
capacities of the 'human mind"
(Tan, 1952:2) may be seen as itself
a technical norm relative to "the
greater self-awareness that results
from it, a sense of one's capacity
and worth as an individual in a
society of free and fully
functioning individuals" (Romulo,
1963:17). In a sense, this is also
where academic freedom leads, to
the development of individuals
able to decide and act for
themselves, thus becoming
people enjoying the liberty not
only to think but also to be fully
human in mind, heart and spirit.
161
 A method (read: technical
norm) enshrined in the University
for bringing mind and soul together
is liberal education. Palma
emphasized its role in developing
the mind: .
Liberal education insures a
broader outlook on God, man
and events; skills the student
to re act pro perl y to' th e
promptings of truth and the
world; and develops in him
acumen and quickness of
mind, so that in the' course of
time he is able to learn
thoroughly the particular
practices of a certain
professional or technical
activity, because they are
nothing more or less thanthe
specific utilization of general
cultural attainments (1925:6).
However, Tan and Sinco both
laid greater stress on the spiritual
and moral values liberal education
develops:
Our educational system
should be less materialistic
and should instead be more
spiritual and cultural 10
emphasis ... We can meet our
problems more efficiently and
face our troubles mo re
serenely if we are fortified
by a certain philosophy of
life and a certain spirituality
based on deep-seated
customs, vi1rtues and tradi-
tions... If our education is to
162
be thus enriched, more
•
emphasis must be given to
liberal education (Tan,
1952:6).
The common core of basic
education is essential for an
understanding of the age in
which we live, for an appre-
ciation of the value of life,
•
and for the recognition of
the true, the noble and the
b e aut i f u 1.: . Li b era I art s
[must] broaden and deepen
the thinking faculties of the
student, develop his imagi-
nation and instill in him a
discriminating sense of values
(Sinco, 1958:5).
Social Justice and Equality.
As we read academic excellence into
Article 2 of our Charter, we may
.
infer the enshrinement of justice
from Article 3 which guarantees
democratic access to every qualified
student "irre,spective of age, sex,
nationality, .religious belie f or political
affiliation." At this time when it is
commonplace, the revolutionary
significance ofopening the University
to women as well as men, Catholics •
and Muslims as well as Protestants,
and to all persons whatever their
party label or nationality, may no
longer be appreciated. Bartlett
emphasized its significance and
joined this obeisance to equality with
the search for truth:
At the very outset, the doors
of higher education are •
• opened to woman as freely
as to man - a result attained
by many other countries of
rich and varied culture only
after the effort of genera-
tions ... Truth, unfettered by
racial, political, or sectarian
• limitations, is to be the
guiding spirit of those who
study and those who teach
(1911:2) .
Open admission based only on
"the passport of intellectual
competence," in Sinco's felicitous
phrase (1958:3), fore shadows
today's concern for social justice
and equality, within and outside
our walls. Jose V. Abueva linked
the struggle in the society with the
• University's own burden of
inequality:
Here in the University, we
cannot speak of the national
economy without stressing
the very ground where it
prospers - social justice. We
cannot speak of social justice
without looking into our-
• selves and testing our
capacity of self-sacrifice ... The
University must seriously
take stock of itself and ask
whether its graduates are
cap ab le of virtue and
sacrifice ... Can we indeed rise
above class interests and
meet squarely the demand
fo r social justice in UP
• (1988:5-6)?
The technique of open
admission has underlying ethical
support in our adherence to
democracy and social justice
which in turn underscores our
res.ponsibility and accountability
to the people of the Philippines.
"The University for the
Filipino." Yet another value that
may be inferred from the Charter
is the distinction of UP as the first
university of the State. Murray C.
Bartlett called it "the University
for the Filipino," proclaiming that
"there can be no grea tne ss w ithou t
nationality" (1911: 10). Stre ssing
that it was born as one of the first
fruits of the Filipino legislature,
Palma considered UP as "the
manifestation [in the educational
field] of the efforts of our people
to become a nation" (1925:3-4). As
such it is expected to serve as "the
chief repository of the nation's
cultural heritage and tradition"
(Tan, 1952:2). But more than that,
it must be attuned to what is
valuable to Filipinos. According to
Palma:
There should run and ring
true this clear-cut question:
Is this study, this method,
this point of view, of un-
questioned and positive
benefit to the Filipino
people? .. We ought to study
preferentially our own things,
not only for the sake of
keeping intact our love for
163
 what is our own and of
rousing and strengthening a
feeling of patriotic pride,
but also for the sake of
encouraging original thinking
and of asserting our indi-
viduality in the realm of the
mind ... The University can do
an infinite amount of good
not only in molding the
. character of each citizen, but
also in shaping the national
character (1925:21-22).
This patriotism thus connects
not only to our scholarly endeavors
in the University, but also to our
stance and action vis-a-vis the
nation. We will not be satisfied with
things as they are, Instead we look
forward to the transformation of
o ur society. Abueva further
developed this idea:
The University, regarding our
history and reawakening to
ad e e per sen s e 0 f 0 u r
heritage and nationhood,
must, through all its actions
and policies reinforce the
Filipino's faith in himself and
pride in his civilization and
culture. We Filipinos can
bring about, by peaceful
means and in freedom, a truly
democratic, just and humane
society. Of this living faith
and pride, the University is
Alma Mater - the nurturing
moth e r 0 f 0 u r soc ie ty I S
transformation, sharing and
re flecting the sp irit and
164
conscience of our race
•
(1988:9-10) ,
From recognizing its role as the
first, even the premier, state
university of the land, it is but a
short step to the acknowledgment
of its obligation to the nation.' Guy
Potter Benton put it directly: •
Let it never be forgotten that
this tax-supported University
exists first, last and all the
time, for the service of the
Philippine people ... Being
maintained at public expense,
UP owes obligations to the
entire supporting consis-
tency ... not only for service
of young people but for the
promotion of the general
welfare (1921:23). •
Other presidents have voiced
the same commitment to p ub lic :
service but as an intrinsic value of
a university, more as an expression
of academic excellence and
academic freedom than a resultant
of reciprocal obligation. ThusJavier
connected the concern for public
service with academic freedom:
In placing UP in the service
of the nation, let there be no
misunderstanding of our
meaning and intentions. We
will not abandon the respon-
sibility and the privilege that
the nation has en trusted to
us since our birth - to be
creator and 'scholar, as well •
• as intellectual crrtrc and
conscience of society. We will
always defend and maintain
the University as the free
space for people of all kinds
of persuasions to think, to
inquire, to criticize and to
propose alte rn ative modes
and discourses. We engage
in criticism not to bring
down the society that
supports us, but to refine the
rough edges of thought, to
lead towards healing the
social cancers, to study what
detracts us from our national
mission, and to help us learn
how we can succeed (1994:9).
But more than association with
• or assistance to government, public
service for the University is service
to the total society. Thus, S.P. Lopez
claimed as his goal
to make the UP more
hospitable to the positive
idealism of our youth and
rrro re relevant to the true
priorities of our national life,
.... an instrument more res-
ponsive to the irrepressible
clamor of our people for the
rapid transformation of our
society so that all may enjoy
the blessings of a better life
in larger freedom (1969:5).
Democratic Governance and
Institutional Autonomy. As a
community of scholars, the
• University seeks to govern itself,
with collegiality as the hallmark of
faculty relations. As a State
university, it is accountable to the
people through their duly ordained
representatives, which in this case
would be members of the Board of
Regents and the President. From the
list of functions of the University
Council and the Board of Regents
in the Charter, one can discern a
system of democratic governance
based on collegiality and account-
ability that through the years has
acquired an ethical patina. In
addition to collegial handling of
academic decisions (in certain
cases, with some checks by the
Board) as provided in the Charter,
faculty participation has been an
ever-increasing demand through
the years. Romulo dealt with it in
his inaugural address as an aspect
of
individual and corporate
freedom which I shall make
it my business to investigate
and, if possible, resolve. I
have noted the desire of the
faculty for more participation
in decisions affecting their
work, their welfare, and
their living conditions.
Along a similar vein, colleges
have asked for more unit
autonomy, and students
greater say in their affairs and
in their relations with the
administration and the
faculty, in which they had
always been at a disadvantage
(1963: 16).
165

"Sharing of powers as well,
as responsibilities between
the administration and the
faculty" became a byword
.during S.P.Lopez's term
(University Council, 1970).
Democratic participation is not
mentioned in the Charter and
"therefore not by law guaranteed
or ensured."Nevertheless, from one
view, over the years the formal
powers and authority of the Board
"have in practice become residual
or reserved, by the Board's choice
and upon prodding by the
constituency" (Alfonso, 1995).
A .cornplement to democratic
governance is institutional
autonomy. Railing against legis-
lation which intrudes into the
University's curricula, Sinco
declared:
We do not doubt the good
and the noble intentions of
the legislator arid the
executive official. But the
life bf an institution of
'highel~ learning has never
been improved by dictation
from without... UlWS could
h e I p 0 n I y w hen th e y
confine themselves to
enhancing the freedom of
the' unive rsity and the
opportunities of the scholar
(Sin co, 1958:19-20).
Elements of an Emerging UP
Ethic. As the discussion shows, the
166
•
major values that we live by may
be regarded as having guided UP
since its birth. In addition, they are
ethical values that are drawn from
and nurtured not only in academe,
but also in the political, social and
economic realms of human
existence. They are interrelated,
such that, for instance, academic
excellence requires academic
freedom and democratic govern-
ance, pushes us to a concern for
full human development, and
becomes the foundation for our
assumption of social responsibility
and public service. Every other
value can be interlinked in some
way. The values we live by force
us out of the ivory tower and into
involvement with our kapwa tao
and the nation.
The Values We Teach: University .
•
Values and Molding of Character
As a University, our· first
responsibility is the education of
students. We can of course
concentrate on the teaching of craft
and assure that we turn outskilled -
even excellent -professionals, artists,
scientists, teachers, and writers,
leaders in all lines of work, But that
is .a narrow construction of what
education is. As Bartlett said:
The first necessity of the
university is not to graduate
skilled engineers, agricul-
turists, or physicians, nor is it
even to produce efficient
scholars; first of all it must •
• turn out men and women,
and manhood and woman-
hood are built upon one
foundation - the development
of character (1911:8).
That kind of education
recognizes that students, like all
• humans, must continually reorder
and come to terms with their sense
of self, the world and ultimate reality.
They need to make meaning not only
of their immediate context, but of
their whole world and existence.
Meaning-making is crucial in that its
patterns and contents in its most
comprehensive dimensions
form the ground of moral
choice; for while we mayor
may not act in a manner
consistent with what we say
we value and believe, human
beings will act so as to align
themselves with what is
perceived to be ultimately
true, trustworthy, and
dependable. Human beings
will behave in a manner that
is consistent with the
• construction held "deep in the
gut" to be the actual reality
of things - what seems to
finally count (Parks, 1993:20-
21).
People do not just seek to
understand themselves and
the world around them, but
also desire to do something
worthwhile, so that their life's
• journey becomes for them a
pur sui t 0 f s ig n i fi can c e
(Denhardt, 1993).
It is thus disheartening to find that
in KAVS, the only survey that the
University has so far done on the
values held by members of the UP
community, students identified their
areas of concern as centered on
individual success and family welfare,
with national and social issues getting
only moderate attention. The over-
all concept of a UP student, based
on student and faculty depiction of
the former's predominant charac-
teristics, is a person with a composite
of the following values: high value
placed on leadership, work ethic, and
intellectual style; neutral to moderate
value placed on social orientation,
orientation towards ethical and moral
values, and relations with teachers;
and low value placed on change
orientation and risk-taking. This high
absorption on self, with the welfare
of others emerging only practically
as afterthought, while arguably
supportive of the University's quest
for excellence, seems discontinuous
with the high value it pu ts on
social responsibility
nationalism, a priority capsulized
and
in the term we use to refer to our
students - Isko lar ng Bay a n .
Given that these are the values
they currently hold, students were
then asked what they perceived
their respective colleges want to
develop in them. They turned out
to be the same qualities they have
mentioned before: leadership, work
167
ethic, and intellectual skills as the
top three, with social orientation
and values/moral uprightness at
distant fourth and -fifth ranks,
respectively (Doronila and Carino,
1993: 88). The is and the ought
relative to the concept of a UP
student are remarkable in their
congruence ..
In addition, the students divined
almost exactly what the members of
the faculty believe are the values they
should impart to students. In the
same survey, what the faculty claimed
they emphasize are leadership,
intellectual capacity, and work ethic,
the same top three as the students
(though with the second and third
ranks interchanged). Social orient-
ation was fourth rank, tying with
student-teacher relations. Morality
and ethics was not even high in the
list of qualities the faculty claimed to
want to develop in their students
(Doronila and Carino, 1993:93).
The top ranks are occupied by
technical norms, with focus of
leadership and the other values not
named. The "for-what" ofleadership
could have redeemed it .from its
instrumental, value-free quality, for
excellence in serving the people is
not. the same as leadership in
banditry. Ifleadership, discipline and
intellectual capacity are developed
devoid of social content and
significance, then the character-
building mission of the University is
going to be sidelined.
168
Theories on Moral Learning
•
and Filipino VaJues. If character
is to be molded, what must its
substance be? Certainly, the same
values that enliven the University as
university are the same ones we want
to see can be translated in the
individuals under our care. Thus,
academic excellence and freedom,
the reverence for truth, human
•
dignity, social justice and equality,
nationalism and social responsibility
can guide individuals as well as an
institution. To analyze how they
cohere into a value system for
transmission to UP students, let me
seek guidance from scholars
engaged in the study of moral
learning and the Filipino character.
In the West, one of the most
influential theorists of the process
oflearning to be moral is lawrence
•
Kohlberg who has posited justice
as the core of morality. In his
formulation of this "ethic of justice,"
people learn to live ethically with
their fellows by upholding rules to
ensure fairness and impartiality,
such commitment to laws leading
to the welfare and protection of the
rights of all. Kohlberg regards each
•
moral person as a rational agent
who is aware of universal ethical
principles. For him, the most
fundamental principle, following
Immanuel Kant, is that "rational
beings... are called perso n s, because
their very nature points them out
as ends in themselves, that is, as
something which must not be used
•
• merely as means" (as quoted in
Kainz, 1988:58). The principles of
justice arise out of equality and
the conditions of cooperation and
are formal principles where the
specific moral content is excluded
(Crittenden, 1990:77).
• Kohlberg shows that moral
reasoning is developed as a person
grasps a set of rules appropriate for
one's stage of ethical judgement,
and is not divorced from the
development of intellect. Resort to
authority and fear is the method
used for children, but that morality
of constraint is gradually replaced
by cooperation as one grows in
knowledge of mutual interpersonal
expectations. These are absorbed
as rules as one gets schooled in
• conventional morality. Finally the
individual becomes more auto-
nomous and reaches the post-
conventional or principled level of
morality. At that point, the rational
individual has already developed a
conscience and a value system and
can determine what is right for
oneself according to self-chosen
• ethical principles. These are not
arbitrary but are based on the
universal principles of equality and
respect for the dignity of human
beings.
Kohlberg's theory seems
compatible with many of the values
we have posited as forming the
ethical system of the University.
•• Aside from justice, they include
human dignity, equality, and the
reverence for truth which in our
case arise out of the exercise of
freedom and the quest for
excellence in academe. The method
of moral education it implies - the
emphasis on autonomy, after the
childhood stage of dependence on
authority - is reminiscent of life in a
university setting with its stress on
rationality and individual freedom.
Morality as part of the process of
cognitive development is also not
alien to a university's perspective.
The Kohlbergian values may be
found in any rendering of the
Filipino ethical system. Enriquez,
for instance, identifies karangalan ,
kataru ngan and kalayaan as the
major societal values of our culture
(1990:66). Dy also posits truth,
justice and human rights as part of
what he calls "Pilipino ethics"
(1994:19-20). However, Filipinos
would have difficulty acting out
Ko hlbe rg's ideal, because their
values and actions tend not to be
bound to law and rules, but to
people's relations with nature and
with e a c h 0 th e r , Th iss tro n g
interpersonal bent is reflected in the
idea that their core value is
pakikipagkapwa-tao (Enriquez,
1990; Licuan an, 1994).3
Filipinos may thus be more
hospitable to Kohlberg's critics who
find his heavy emphasis on rules
and justice difficult to follow. In this
regard, an alternative ethic offered
169
by Carol Gilligan may be more in
keeping with how Filipinos view fair
and moral conduct Gilligan disputes
the adequacy of Kohlberg's "vortex
of maturity" where the fully grown
man shows that he has learned
'Justice, autonomy, individual rights,
equality and the authoritatively
rational resolution of conflict"
(Crittenden 1990:89). She suggests
that the vortex may be better viewed
as bifurcated, with one tine stressing
justice and the other being moved
by "nurturance, concern for the other,
equality and the recognition of
different points ofview" (Crittenden,
1990:90). Instead of a formal logic
of fairness resolved by recourse to
rights and rules, morality under
Gilligan's "ethic of care" is based on
the "psychological logic of relations"
(Crittenden, 1990:90)
Stated in these terms, the two
ethics may appear to come from
different sources, the ethic of justice
from the mind, and the ethic of care
from the heart. In addition, Gilligan
has criticized Kohlberg's analysis for
its gender bias, being descriptive, she
claims, only of a male set of values.
She has called her work In a Differen t
VOice with the new one she brings
purportedly belonging to females.
Rather than drawing a sharp
distinction between the ethic of
justice and the ethic of care and
seeing their differences primarily in
gender terms, I want to suggest a
possible convergence of the two
ethics. In this regard, the aphorism
170
of Christian theologian Reinhold
•
Niebuhr is appropriate:
Any justice which is only
justice soon degenerates into
something less than justice. It
must be saved by something
which is more than justice (as
quoted in Wren, 1977:43). •
The explication of justice in the
Christian understanding has three
strands. The first strand is the notion
of "natural justice" which ordains
the equal worth of human beings
and thus the fair division of goals
and gifts as first priority. This is
practically a restatement. of
Kohlberg's virtue based on rules
and recalls the rational theory of
justice as fairness (Rawls, 1971).
But the second and third strands
are in Gilligan's voice - "saving
•
justice" or justice as liberation (the
righteous God setting his people
free, making a political event also
religious and spiritual), and "loving
justice," which goes beyond mercy
and judgment of friendship. caring
and full acceptance of persons.
liberating and loving justice does
not make decisions based on •
rational calculations of equal
divisions, but "accepts all alike, just
and unjust, without conditions, in
order to overcome alienation and
injustice and reconcile people to
God and to each other" (Wren,
1988:50).
.'
I do not mean to go religious
by citing Christian philosophy. In-
• fact, Crittenden links caring and
justice in a similar way without
leaving the secular sphere (1990:
91-92). Rather I want to show that
the presence of nurturance and
interpersonal relationships in an
ethical system does not convey that
caring is a characteristic only of
• a female value system as Gilligan
suggests, nor is it only Christian,
nor for that matter, only Filipino.
It is not a wimpy quality next to
an ethic of laws and abstract
principles, but it can become a
strong moral system worthy of
pride.
Nevertheless, while the ethic of
care can be detected clearly in
Philippine culture, it does not fit
as easily into UP's academic culture.
• Pardy this may be due to the strong
hold of rationality in the university,
with the possible concomitant
dismissal of non-rational (though
not necessarily irrational) bases of
thought and action. There may also
be a fear that allowing the entry of
affective dimensions would weaken
objectivity and the attainment of
• academic excellence. Whatever the
reason, the low value given to
caring in the university may be seen
in the relative absence of its
mention In the presidents'
speeches."
This was also the case in the
pre-survey KAVS interviews. In
'.
the 37 descriptive phrases culled
about the University from them
and incorporated in the Likert
scale of the KAVS survey, not one
conveyed this idea (Doronila and
Carino, 1993:71,223). Meanwhile,
in the 46 phrases describing the
faculty, only three - "considerate,"
"compassionate" and "approach-
able" tapped the caring
dimension. None of them showed
among the top ten ranking qualities
in the nine colleges under study;
the faculty as "compassionate" even
ranked eighth from the bottom
(Doronila and Carino, 1993:58,
221). Indeed, informal conver-
sations with students in my classes
and in Ugnayan ng Pahinungod
programs bring out the image of
the University as uncaring and
uninterested in students as persons.
The University thus lines up with
cultures tending towards an ethic of
justice, while Philippine culture itself
leans towards an ethic of care; a
complementation of these two, a
mind-heart solution as it were, (Dy,
1994:17-18)5 may be worthy of
development. In the process of
moving towards that, two caveats
must be presented. First, it is
necessary to recognize the shadows
behind even the most valued
qualities we possess. And second,
we must note a possible danger in
humanizing the ethic of justice, that
is, it may push morality to degenerate
into an interpersonal issue only,
over-shadowing systematic social
commitments.
Positive and Negative Sides
of Values. Lieu an an raises the
171
following warning regarding the
Filipinos' person-orientation:
As a people, we are person-
oriented, and relationships
with others are a very
important part of our lives.
Thus, we are capable of much
caring and concern for others.
On the other hand, in the
extreme our person-
orientation leads to lack of
objectivity and a disregard for
universal rules and proce-
dures ·so that everyone,
regardless of our relationship
with them, is treated equally.
Our person-orientation leads.
us to be concerne d for
people and yet unfair to some
(1994:36).
The recognition that a quality
may have darkness and light is
important in building character in
the Philippine situation for three
reasons:
(a) Arraying the strengths and
weaknesses of the Filipino character
side by side provide s a good
example of the need for the golden
mean recommended by Aristotle."
The Moral Recovery Program's list
of s tr e ngths an d we akne s se s
(Shahani 1987) begs for juxta-
position and the search for the
mean. Behindpakikipagkapllla-tao
as a strength is the counterpoint of
personalism, a weakness; close
family ties raise the specter of
nepotism and the lack of concern
172
for the common good; flexibility,
•
adaptability and creativity turned
around is lack of discipline; faith
and religiosity may breed passivity
and lack of initiative; and so on.
(b) We tend to highlight what is
negative about us. Thus, Quito (1994)
devoted an entire article for the silver
lining behind the dark clouds,
•
because when Filipinos are asked to
describe themselves, they think and
mention their negative traits almost
to the exclusion of any redeeming
value.
Similarly, Enriquez (1990) took
issue with the stress given by Lynch
and de Guzman (1973) to biy a, utang
n a lo ob and pakikisama, because
.those surface values picture Filipinos
as only accommodative and tending
to surrender their rights to others.
•
Instead, he introduces b a b ala n a
(viewed as determination rather than
fatalism), sam a at laka s ng loob and
pakikibaka as their counterpart
confrontative values, all showing the
Filipino's capacity for independent
thinking, initiative and strength.
Recognizing the antonyms is thus
important for a comprehensive view
•
of our culture.
(c) Identifying the counterpoint
ofour values is important for training
students and ourselves about the
practice of ideals in real life.
Recognizing the shadows will
soften the judging and
moralism that may have •
• characterized our attitudes and
behavior for years ... People
seem to be afraid that if they
re fleet on their moral principles
they might lose ethical
sensitivity altogether. [But] as
we deal with the soul's
complexity, morality can
t· deepen and drop its simplicity,
becoming at the same time
both more demanding and
more flexible (Moore,
1994: 17).
In addition, rarely are moral
choices set in extreme terms where
one may know beyond the shadow
of a doubt which is the right path
to take. Rather, we must prepare
students for moral dilemmas, so
• that, faced with uncertainty in
information but guided by
principles which can be applied to
actual conditions, they are able
to emerge on the side of truth,
justice and human dignity most of
the time.
Privatized versus Public
Morality. It is perhaps striking
• to find in our earlier discussion
that UP values are directed not at
private satisfaction but at public
gain. For instance, responsibility
can very w e ll be merely one's
commitment to family and friends.
Yet, such a value is expressed in
the University as social respon-
sibility and as our accountability
to the Filipino people. Similarly,
academic freedom can be
,* regarded as the pursuit of
individualism par excellence, but
as it is enshrined in the University,
its referent is the good of the
community, the stress being on
UP's role as critic and conscience
of society. Excellence itself is
manifested in leadership, for not
only do we seek a social focus
for our preeminence but it also
moves us with a sense of
stewardship toward helping our
fellows . .As Javier (1994:11) stated:
Bu t w hat is the honor 0 f
being at the top of our
educational system, a
towering tree, so to speak,
in a barren forest? Our status
as such will be meaningful
only by taking an active
hand in improving our
educational system, in
helping to develop other tall
trees in the forest. What UP
has achieved is not to be
kept to ourselves, but to be
shared.
However, at the level of
individuals, the societal commit-
ment seems to be muted, if not
lost. This is shown by the students
in the KAVS survey but is
probably not unique to them. For
instance, when Harvard Business
School was starting its Leadership,
Ethics an d Corporate Respon-
sibility Program, it also found that
the achievement of personal success
was the primary value among its
students. This does not mean that
they were amoral, because the
173
students stated the ideal of doing
one's personal best, although with
"a total absence of substantive
values" and with ''little self-
reflective choice" (Parks, 1993:25).
They also voiced moral commitments
in general terms, cherishing such
values as human dignity, integrity
and compassion, usually with
respect to their relationship with
people, especially in face-to-face
situations. But they could hardly
make the leap to a level of morality
that faces up to the socio-political
implications of their actions (Parks,
1993:26-29) .
Thus, while they deal fairly with
subordinates, peers and suppliers,
they do not apply the same
principles in appraising the social
significance (or harm) of the
products they foist on unsuspecting
customers, or of policies that would
dislocate communities outside their
direct compass. This societal level-
public morality - seems less dominant
because its effects are distant from
the decision maker who must use
abstraction and rules in arriving at
his choices in cases like this.
Implications on Teaching. .As
a teaching institution, the University
has a responsibility to develop
ch aracte r, particularly among its
students. This to a large extent
would entail the translation of its
value system as an institution to the
individual level. The KAVS study
showed a predominance of self-
orientation and interpersonal
174
morality and revealed a gap
•
between the values we live by and
the values we teach. A program of
teaching values may start from
Kohlberg's cognitive development
theory with an ethic of justice at its
core. It has rationality and abstract
rules as the bases for virtuous
action, similar to the University's
own approach to values. However,
•
it needs to be complemented by an
ethic of care against which it has
often been placed at odds. The
ethic of care, which tends to be
more compatible with Philippine
culture, adds nurturance and a
concern for people to the appli-
cation of abstract universal
principles. Such a composite ethic
should recognize the darkness and
light of certain values, particularly
because of the Filipinos' personal-
istic orientation and tendency to see
•
themselves in negative terms. It
should thus prepare students for the
fact that the application of
principles is a difficult, reasoned
deed. It should also make sure that
morality is construed, as the
University does, not only as correct
interpersonal behavior but as an
ethic of social commitment.
•
The moral education called for
should produce not only nice"
individuals, but also persons able to
engage in critical analysis for the
public good. Here, one needs more
than an Ugnayan ng Panghinungod
where students and faculty personally
touch the lives of those in need.
Rather this interpersonal experience •
• must be placed in a socio-political
context and be used for social gain.
This occurred, for example, when
the civil servants we immersed in the
barrios moved from the happy
feeling of do-gooding to using their
new understanding of the social
• situation when conceptualizing and
implementing programs to tackle the
poverty and inequality in our country
(Carino and Vifieza, 1980).
The approach may thus need to
be supplemented by the teaching of
considerations of public interest in
the professional training of students.
This is not the province of political
science or public administration
\
alone. For everyone - not only
political and administrative officials,
• but also lawyers, engineers, scientists,
writers, a lot of people who don't
serve in the front line - can be the
appropriate listener to the lecture
Piper recalls:
You are going to have an
enormous power to do bad
things when you finish your
education here. When you get
• into practice, you'll be
shocked at the incredible
opportunities to mess up
other people's lives... Most
iaw school professors don't
like to talk about the
destructive capacity you'll all
hold as lawyers. I hope we
can talk about that here, and
'. I also hope we can talk about
some of the good things you
can do, which, unfortunately,
are often a little harder to
accomplish (Cited in Piper,
1993:5).
The Values We Serve For:
The University and National Goals
Both as a university and as an
institution of the State, UP recognizes
commitment to the nation, public
service, and accountability to the
Filipino people among its primal
values. These values link us with
Philippine society and government.
The University has always
maintained a complex relationship
with government. In the words of
Abueva:
The University is a partner of
government rather than a
collaborator. It keeps a critical
distance from its policies and
official acts, but is never
aloof. It is grateful for its
share in the national budget,
but keeps its autonomy. It is
by nature constructively
critical, and zealous of its
freedom, but inspired by the
moral integrity and selfless
dedication of public servants,
it commits itself whole-
heartedly through its teaching
and research to the support
of national goals and the
realization of our people's
aspirations (1988:4-5).
The first role ofthe University vis-
a-vis government and social issues
175
is to use academic freedom to
translate its reverence for truth and
pursuit of academic excellence to
societal use. Edgardo J. Angara
stated clearly their interconnection:
What we do here, and do
best, is put ideas on trial..
There is no question, social
or national, so pressing as to
justify any relaxation of rigor
prescribed by the University's
standards of excellence ... The
clarification of issues, the
discove ry 0 f facts, the
exposure of distortions and
lies, and the presentation of
reasoned alternatives - these
are what we are good at
(1983:7).
The question to be raised' then
is: what would be the content of
the critique? That would be drawn
from the other values we have
enshrined in UP - social justice,
equality, democracy, commitment
to the nation. In my discipline, we
use two queries as criteria for
judging the moral authority of a
theory. It is capable of a more
general application and I offer it
here as a standard for assessing the
direction of Philippine develop-
ment goals and programs: .
Does it lead us to raise
questions which serve the
needs of those who live in the
society? Does it offer
possibilities for human
improvement? (Kronenberg,
1971:192) .
176
Karina Constantino-David (1979:
•
123) provided a compendium of
what such a critique might involve
almost two decades ago. It is still
relevant today when the Medium
Term Philippine Development Plan
is supporting the vision of
Philippines 2000:
1. The criticism 0 f the prevailing
•
social order with the end in view
ofmaking it more responsive to the
interest of the people,
2. The unmasking of the unjust
character of the prevailing social
order in such a manner that the
people are able to gain a sharper
view of the nature of their social
conditions and of the workings of
their society,
3. The concrete depiction of the
•
objective conditions in which the
large majority of the population live
and attempt to explain these in
terms of the type of social order in
which they are made to participate,
4. The constant elaboration of
the features of alternative social
orders and attempts to test their
•
mobility within the concretely
e xisting society,
5.' The elaboration of the
people's aspirations and conception
of ideal social orders, constructing.
their social structural requirements
and the use and popularization of
these frameworks for evaluating the
suitability of the existing social
order,
•
• 6. The collection of useful
information about the va rro u s
phenomena occurring in society
and their dissemination to the
masses so that the latter may
develop the capacity to effectively
hold decision-makers responsible
and accountable for what they do.
• Social criticism is the special task
of the University made as an act of
stewardship, ofusing one's talent for
the good of the country, and as a
demonstration of commitment to the
nation, in the spirit of chastening that
which one loves. However, we can
carry this to an extreme and act
instead with intellectual arrogance
expecting to playa key role in social
processes just because we come from
UP. Sometimes this is a shadow to
• which our vaunted dedication to
academic excellence can bring us.
In addition to serving as the
society's conscience, the University
is also called to involvement. As 0.0.
Corpuz (1975:2) states:
There can only be one
• meaning of the leadership of
the UP graduate and this is,
leadership in the making of
contributions towards the
happiness, the safety, and the
justice of our nation. Our
national life, what we are
and what we can be, is the
sum of everything that we
contribute to and withhold
from the national achieve-
• men t - w h e th e r it be 0 u r
virtue or vice, mischief or
benevolence, our energy or
indolence, neglect or
conce rn, comp e te nce 0 r
ineptitude, equity or
exploitation - what we are
and what we can ever be are
but the sum of what we give
to and what we take out from
our shared national life.
The hope is that the sum total
of our actions would be positive.
This is the vision ofJavier when he
redefined our students from being
"the best and the brightest" to being
simply "the best" - that is, "the
brightest and the most
committed." An Iseo lar ng
Bay an must not only be a
recipient of the people's
ben e fi c e n c e but a 1s 0 a
p a b in u s g o d who IS their
willing servant (1994:12).
Offering oneself in the service
of one's country may certainly be
in terms of one's career in the
field in which one trained in UP.
This is clearly what Sinco had in
mind:
We can only speculate what
might have been the state of
the public health, the
administration of justice, the
public works and improve-
ments, the transportation and
communication system, and
all the other phases of our
national life had the Unive r-
177
 sity of the Philippines
neglected the proper mainte-
nance of its professional
colleges ... This University
stands ready to produce that
needed supply of profe s-
sionals with technical
preparation sufficient to
enable them to render
intelligent and satisfactory
service (1958:12, 13).
The service may be, for those
who work in the University, in
extension and consultancy
programs, where involvement in
policy may enable one to move
from "social outrage to reasoned
critique, [from] impassioned
demand to coherent .program"
(Angara, 1983:7).
Angara's statement wamedus
not to get too carried away by our
advocacy. There is danger in the
other direction. In an earlier Faculty
Conference, Benjamin Carino
decried
the tendency of the faculty
member to avoid involvement
in social and political issues
that confront the University
and the large r so cie ty 0 f
which it is a part.. Many
faculty members often pay lip
service to the role which the
University must play in
helping resolve the problems
and issues that characterize
our developing society but
only a few make the ir
positions clear [in the
178
classroom or elsew here] on
•
even the most basic issues
that confront our society
today. In the process,
teachers reveal to the students
the superficial esteem which
they attach to the educational
process thus resulting in
further alienation [of the
student from the teacher]
•
(1972:201) .
In this situation, one may plead
that academic freedom also allows
one to remain uninvolved, but that
stance detracts from both public
service and the pursuit of academic
excellence.
The Values We Debate About:
Interrelations and Disjunctions
•
The values we live by are a set
of principles which have oriented
and held us together since the
creation of the University. .As such,
the University' Charter is a good
starting point for the identification of
such a UP ethic. From the purposes
of the University, we have defined
the ideal of academic excellence
which, based on reason, requires
•
academic freedom and supports the
quest for truth. Academic freedom
in tum brings us to liberalism and
the significance of individuals as
persons. From that and the
p rincip le of democratic access,
we have understood the University's
commitment to justice, equality and
again, human dignity . .As a State
University, we recognize the value
of democratic governance as well as
•
• our pride in being Filipino and our
accountability to the people. In tum
they trigger public service and social
responsibility. But social respon-
sibility itself flows from academic
excellence, since the leadership it
develops must find a focus in service
beyond self. The values are in fact
• interlinked at several points.
In the KAVS, we called the values
collectively as "the UP tradition,"
suggesting the beginnings of what
may be called an ethic, a system of
converging and mutually enriching
set of values which are enduring and
capable of universal acceptance.
That there is emerging acceptance of
such an ethic may be inferred from
the fact that the special provisions
on academic excellence, academic
freedom, democratic access, and
social responsibility and institutional
autonomy in the draft University
Charter were consensually accepted
and stirred no con tro ve rsy," in
contrast to the reception that greeted
the inclusion of other provisions.
However, I would be re miss if I
• ignore the tensions within and
among these values. Some of them
have already been identified in the
preceding sections. Others emerged
as I was exploring the presence of a
value or its own application. Here I
will summarize some of the issues
already discussed, and raise new
problems and challenges as
appropriate. In an exploratory paper
like this, I can do no more than
• recognize the tensions and their
sources and leave their deeper
analysis to a later time, to the real
philosophers and more capable
social scientists.
Meta-ethical Problems. Two
tensions fall under the rubric of
meta-ethical problems. One is
whether and how a mix of an ethic
based on reason and an ethic based
on relationship can merge in an
institution. I have suggested such a
convergence without actually
analyzing the cost to objectivity, for
instance, that it might entail. Also,
we would have to explore what
approach to use to hasten the
emergence of an ethic of care cum
justice in the University: can it be
done simply by redefining the values
involved or by learning a new
perspective which admits such a
convergence?
Another meta-ethical issue cove rs
translation problems, as when a
value developed at the level of an
institution is to be transformed into
a value at the individual level.
Academic excellence, freedom,
justice, social responsibility and
so on - all these can be mani-
fested by both institutions and
individuals. But while the
University is able to maintain the
desired public morality, the
movement from an interpersonal,
privatized morality to a societal
commitment seems more difficult
for individual students, at least as
based on the KAVS.
179
 Sociological Issues. One
tension may be sociological in
nature. In this case, the norms ofa
subculture such as the University
may extend or contradict the norms
of the main culture. As a special
institution within society, an
_academic institution is expectedly
rational and set apart from the rest
of society, and it may be valued
precisely for that distinction. That
is why its assumption of the role of
social critic has usually been
tolerated, except by the most
authoritarian of regimes. That is
also why UP's democratic govern-
ance- and institutional autonomy are
generally accepted.
On the other hand, UP is also
supposed to share some of the
society's values, and in some cases,
serve as a microcosm of that bigger
culture. That is why, this time, the
University finds it necessary to
begin the practice of social
justice, democracy and trans-
formation in its own house. But
it is a role modeling that is easier
to pre ach than to do and the
University's record in this
enterprise needs to be further
analyzed.
Differen t In terpretations of
the Same Values. Tensions also
arise from the problem of agreeing
on what the value itself is. This
may be because different things
are called by the same name, or
there is conflict among different
value-bearers of what should be
180 .
enshrined. This may occur when
•
the same value is revered by people
with different ideological positions.
N a ti 0 0. a lis m fo ron e may be
chauvinism and jingoism to another,
and one side may label the other
"ideological" and itself as right
(read: moral) but ideologically
neutral. This is a trap Francisco
Nemenzo has warned about:
The only way to free our-
selves from the ideological
grip of the status quo is by
conscious revolt; but to revolt
. is to embrace a coun te r-
ideology. The conservative
who cannot transcend the
existing system easily com-
prehends the ideological
content of the radical position
but sees his own perspective
as part of the natural order
of things. He disdains to
admit that acquiescence, like
revolt, is itself an ideological
position (1979:6).
These different positions are
expected to be advanced through
rational discourse and debate,
which the University's academic •
freedom and liberalism foster.
However, the substitute for debate
Nemenzo described seems to be
frequently resorted to:
The conservative intel-
lectuals, on the other hand,
were too timid or too
arrogant; they either lacked
the guts to argue their' •
• position or they dismissed the
radical ideology as too idiotic
to merit a serious rejoinder.
On th e 0 th e r han d , th e
radicals gave valid grounds
for being so regarded. Their
position was encrusted with
undigested doctrines. They
• relied on flag waving,
sloganeering, and character
assassination as their chief
instruments of advocacy.
Instead of debating, both
sides merely mocked and
sneered at each other
(1979:8).
How Values Are Applied.
There are also tensions engendered
by the question of the uses to
which a value is put. Angara
raised this point as regards
academic freedom and the quest
for truth:
Academic freedom has been
used to challenge any
attempt to pervert the
University to the political
uses of establishments. That
• is correct. It has been used
to challenge any proposal to
confine the pursuit of new
learning to certain directions.
That, too, is correct. But it has
also been used to challenge
any demand for order in
thinking, ration ality in dis-
course, respectful sobriety in
'.
argument, and clarity in the
development and expression
of concepts that are, some-
times, just moods (Angara,
1983:5).
Corpuz, meanwhile, suggests a
specific understanding of the
quest for truth and a way of
wielding academic freedom:
The intellectual life of a
university is in seeking, and
questing, for ideas, so thatwe
may have a surer sense and
understanding of truth. This
has nothing to do with
warring opinions. Nor should
the University offer itself as
a cockpit for fighting ideas,
especially if those ideas are
merely orthodoxies against
an issue of partisan nature.
If the University should
engage in the politics ofideas
it should lend itself to the
expression of viewpoints
other than the conventional
and established orthodoxies,
so that it be neither advocate
nor adversary, but a catalyst
and an enriching agent
(1975: 12).
In addition, there are tensions
that come about because of a sense
of limits and a concomitant desire
to accept a golden mean instead of
either extreme:
Academic freedom gives us
the total freedom to choose
our convictions but it
simultaneously demands that
we justify our choice with the
181
 utmost intellectual rigor and
expressive clarity. It rejects
out of hand any attempt by
us to make for a deficiency
in either with' a mere
declaration of benign intent
on our p art..; The University
guarantees absolute freedom
of thought and expression,
but the guarantee assumes
. the universal acceptance of a
modicum of order and
hierarchy (Angara, 1983:6).
We meet even more problems
at the level of application. How
often have we heard academic
freedom being used as a defense
for the lack of syllabus, frequent
absence and laziness in the
classroom? Public service has also
been the buzzword for over-
commitment in activities outside
the University that in turn shows
up in the lack of rigor and
discipline in teaching and re-
search. In the push for academic
excellence operationalized as good
grades, students have sought to
survive at all costs, setting aside
such other values as honesty and
even human dignity. .
Conflict amongValues. There
are also genuine moral quandaries
which the University and its
constituents constantly face. The
most difficult of these are choices
among ethical alternatives, all being
desired and desirable (Madsen and
Shafritz, 1992: 14-17). Here people
of strong moral convictions and
182
holding to the same ethical
•
principles may still find themselves
in strong disagreement with each
other.
Perhaps the best current
example is the impending policy on
provincial quotas which pits
democracy and social justice against
academic excellence. How everthe
•
policy is operationalized, as long
as there is a limit to the number of
students we can admit, there will
inevitably be some persons who
could have been admitted on the
basis of merit alone who would
have to give way to others with
lower academic qualifications than
they (although still qualified) in the
interest of increasing democratic
access to the University. In such a
case we can do no more than seek
a balance because both values are
..
the appropriate foci of proud
commitment.
Balance is also what we seek in
dealing with governance issues: as
against the norm of collegiality as
a community of scholars we array
our accountability as a State
university to the people through •
their political representatives and
duly constituted authority in the
University hierarchy.
The golden mean can also be
applied in the justice versus care
question, for in enthroning
rationality and objectivity, we may
brush aside concern for our
students and fellows as persons. •
• In other cases, we get into
lower-level moral mazes which pit
the high ground of principle with
problems of administrative feasi-
bility. There is no debate about the
University doing all it can about
social justice through socialized
• tuition. It is the bracketing, the
time it takes to inform students
of their brackets, the lack offunds
for home visits: these are issues
tha t rankle (se tting aside the
slogan of income generation that
students use as political fodder
against it).
Concluding Remarks.
The University is now at the
forefront of the search for the
• proper role of a secular academic
institution in advancing the
identification, study and propa-
gation of ethics and morality within
itself, among its students and in
the country. I have concentrated,
in this paper, on the identification
problem. In the process, I have
found enduring values which
together show the distinctiveness of
• UP as an institution. These values
are interlinked enough to show
the beginnings of an ethic.
However, there are also tensions
and disjunctions among them,
stemming from issues of meta-
ethics, culture, use, inter-
•
pretations, and moral quandaries
and mazes.
These tensions are problem-atic,
but also creative. They tell us that
the UP ethic is dynamic, that its
elements continually go through
a testing by fire. The presence of
the tensions further suggest that
the University's current acknow-
ledgment of the significance of
values will not become a sterile
exercise which will u n i te the
University's disparate thinking
sectors into one cowed consensus.
The advantage of finding the UP
ethic as always only on the verge
of emergence is that it will
continuously force us to find,
debate on, and reaffirm what our
main values are and how they may
be applied. The continuing debate
will exercise our minds; the
constant confrontation with ethical
quandaries will excite our moral
i m a g i n a tio n ." The resulting
reflection will make us a better
University, more capable of
molding the character of our
students, better able to be of service
to our nation.
The author gratefully acknowledges
Oscar Alfonso, Ma. Cynthia Rose B.
Bautista and Ma. wisa C. Doronila for
comments on the earlier draft of this
paper .
183
 Notes
1Many philosophers recog-
nize a third type- the aesthetic
norm- which is concerned with
happiness and enjoyment, par-
ticularly of beauty and the good
life, while others put together the
aesthetic and' ethical values, ar-
guing that "happiness turns out
to be the activity of the soul in
accordance with virtue"
(Aristotle, cited in Kainz, 1988:1).
While I agree with Kainz that the
aesthetic can be separated from
the ethical good, I do not think
this is central to the discussion
and thus leave out talking about
aesthetic norms altogether.
2They were identified
through an analysis of inaugural/
investiture speeches of all Uni-
versity presidents and of various
documents produced by the Sys-
tem (e.g., minutes of meetings of
the Board of Regents), and UP
Diliman (minutes of University
Council meetings, college/unit
KAVS reports, the Philippine Col-
legian, etc. See Doronila and
Carino, 1993.)
3Dy (1994) added the values
of solidarity, non-violence and
the holy in his "Pilipino ethics."
These belong more to what Ldis-
cuss in the paper as the ethics of
care and in' that light affirms
Enriquez's and licuanan's char-
acterization of Filipino values.
184
•
,41 saw the term "care and
share" in the penultimate para-
graph of Corpuz's investiture
address and found it as an
underlying theme in Javier's in-
vestiture speech (1994). However,
I still have to make a careful re- •
reading of all the other
speeches before concluding
that it is definitely missing in
all the others.
SDy (1994:17-18) initially as-
serts that "Pilipino ethics" must
be an ethics of value which
comes from the heart, because
the Filipino "tends to act more
from the promptings of his heart,
from the intuitive and immedi-
ate grasp of reality. More accu-
-.
rately, he acts from his kalooban,
which in reality is inseparably
heart-mind." However, he ends
with: "Rather than ... deontolo-
gical ethics which emphasize rea-
son and may be alien to the
Pilipino personality, an ethics of
value is precisely attuned to this
personality." I am then more
faithful to his middle assertion
•
than to his final choice.
6Aristotle, in Nicomachean
Ethics, states thus: "Virtue is a
state of character concerned
with choice, lying in a mean,
i.e., the mean relative to us, this
being determined by a rational
principle." The golden mean is
•
• not an arithmetic mid-point, but
a position arrived at, rationally
but relative to the decision
maker, rather farther away from
one's inclination or the easy al-
ternative. See Kainz, 1988:49-
50.
• "Th e issue of democratic
governance is an exception to
this generalization.
"Ihe term "moral imagina-
tion" is fro m William Carlos
Bibiliography
A. InauguraVlnvestiture Addresses
of UP Presidents
• Abueva, Jose V.
1988 'To Build a Just, Humane
and Democratic Society,"
investiture speech delivered
on September 1.
Angara, Edgardo J.
1983 Investiture Speech delivered
on June 18.
• Bartlett, Murray C.
1911 "A University for the
Filipino," inaugural address
delivered on December 20.
Benton, Guy Potter.
1921 "Objectives of the Tax-
Supported University of the
Philippine Islands." Inau-
gural address delivered on
•• December 16.
Williams, physician and author
of novels which Coles (1993)
used in his course "The Busi-
ness World: Moral and Social
Inquiry through Fiction" at
Harvard Business School. Ac-
cording to Williams, he wrote
the stories "to affect them [the
readers] deeply, to excite their
moral imagination in such a
way that they sweat and
tremble, toss and turn" (quoted
in Coles, 1993:78).
Corpuz, Onofre D.
1975 "The Self-liberation of the
Filipino,"investiture address
delivered on April 13.
Javier, Emil Q.
1994 "UP in the Service of the
Nation: Recapturing the
Sense of National Purpose,"
investiture speech delivered
on June 18.
Lopez, Salvador P.
1969 'The University as Social
Critic and Agen t 0 f" Social
Change," inaugural address
delivered on September 9.
Palma, Rafael
1925 Inaugural Address delivered
on July 18.
Romulo, Carlos P.
1963 'Toward the Best University
135
 for. the Filipino," inaugural
address delivered on April
7.
Sinco, VicenteG.
1958 "The University of the
Philippines and its Mission,"
inaugural address delivered
on June 18.
Tan, Vidal A.
1952 "Th e Ro leo f 0 u r Sta te
University," inaugural ad-
dress delivered on April 8.
Villamor, Ignacio.
1915 "Th e University and the
People," inaugural address
delivered on August 12.
B. Other References
Alfonso, Oscar
1995 Personal Communication.
Carino, Benjamin V.
. 1973 "The University Employee
as an Agent for Social
Change," in Juan F. Jamias
(ed). The University of the
Philippines and National
Developm en t: Report on the
1972 UP Fa cu Ity Co nfe r-
en ce, Diliman, Quezon City:
University of the Philip-
ptnes.
Carino, ledivina V. And Emma B.
Vineza.
1980 The In d a n g Experience:
Ls sson sfro m the First Career
Executive Service Develop-
186
m e n t Program Barrio
•
Immersion. Makati: Deve-
lopment Academy of the
Philippines.
Coles, Robert.
1993 "Storytellers' Ethics," in
Kenneth R. Andrews (ed.).
Ethics in Practice: Managing
the Moral Corporation.
•
Boston, Mas s .: Harvard
Business School Press:77-84.
Crittenden, Paul.
1990 Le a r n in g to be Moral:
Philosophical Thoughts
about Moral Development.
New B and london: Humani-
ties Press International.
David, Karina Constantino
1979 "Notes' on Ledevina V.
Carino's 'A Policy Research
•
in the Se rvice 0 f the
People,''' in Emilita L Cruz
and Ma , Carmen Jimenez
(eds.). Social Science for the
People: Way1 and Means of
Planning Social Science
Research in the Service ofthe
People. Diliman, Quezon
City: Division of Social
•
Sciences, College of Arts and
Sciences, University of the
Philippines: 121-24.
Denhardt, Robert B.
1993 The Pursuit of Significance:
Strategies for Managerial
Success in Public Organi-
zations. Belmont: Wads-
worth. •
• Doronila, Maria Luisa C. and
ledivina V. Carino (eds.).
1993 Th e Me ani ng of UP Edu -
cation: Main Research
Report, Volume 1. Diliman,
Quezon City: Education
Research Program, Center
for Integrative and Deve-
lopment Studies and the
University of the Philippines
Press.
Dy, Manuel B., Jr.
1994 "Outline of a Project of
Pilipino Ethics," in Manuel
B. Dy, Jr. (ed.). Values in
Philippine Culture and
Edu c a tion: Philippin e Philo-
sop b i c a l Studies, I.
Washington, D.C.: The
Council for Research in
• Values and Philosophy:17-
22.
Enriquez, Virgilio G.
1990 "Indigenous Personality
Theory," in Indigenous
Psychology: A Book of
Readings. Diliman: Aka-
demya ng Sikolohiyang
• Pilipino:285-310.
Kainz, Howard P.
1988 FJhics in Context: Towards
the Definition and DIffer-
entiation of the Morally
Good. London: MacMillan
Press.
'.
licuanan, Patricia B. et al.
1994 "A Moral Recovery Program:
Building a People - Building
a Nation," in Manuel B. Dy ~
Jr. (ed.). Values in Philip-
pine Culture and Biucation:
Philippine Philosophical
Studies,1. Washington, D.C..
The Council for Research in
Values and Philosophy:31-
48.
Lynch, Frank X and Alfonso de
Guzman II (eds.).
1973 Po u r Readin gs on Philippine
Values. Quezon City: Ateneo
de Manila University Press.
4 th edition.
Madsen, Peter and Jay M. Shafritz .
(e ds.).
1992 ''Introduction,'' in Essen tials.
of Go vern men t Ethics: A
Collection of Key Articles by
Lading Social Thinkers.
New York: A Meridian
Book: 1-18.
Moore, Thomas.
1992 Care of the Soul. New York:
Harper Perennial.
Nemenzo, Francisco.
1979 ''Keynote Address," in Emilita
L. Cruz and Ma. Carmen
Jimenez (eds.). Social
Science for the People: Ways
and Means of Planning
Social Science Research in
the Service of the People.
Diliman, Qu e zo n City:
Division of Social Sciences,
College of Arts and Sciences,
University of the Philip-
pines:2-9.
187
 Parks, Sharon Daloz.
1993 "Is It Too ute? Young Adults
and the Formation of Pro-
fessional Ethics:' in Thomas
R. Piper, Mary C. Gentile
and Sharon Daloz Parks.
Can Bhics Be Ta ug b ti:
Perspectives, Challenges and
Approaches at Harvard
Business Sc b oo l., Boston,
Ma ss.: Harvard Business
School: 13-72 ..
The Philippine Legislature
1908 The University Charter, Act
No. 1870, "An Act for the
Purp ose 0 f Founding a
University 0 f the Philippine
Islands, giving it corporate
existence, providing for a
Board of Regents, defining
the Board's responsibilities
and duties, providing higher
and professional instruction,
and for other purposes."
Piper, Thomas R.
1993 "Rediscovery of Purpose: The
Genesis of the Leadership,
Ethics and Corporate Re s-
ponsibility Initiative," in
Thomas R. Piper, Mary C.
Gentile and Sharon Daloz
Parks. Can Ethics Be Taught?:
Perspectives, Challenges and
Approaches at Harvard
Business School. Boston,
Mass.: Harvard Business
School:1-12.
• Books.
Quito, Emerita S.
1994 'The Ambivalence of Filipino
J
188
Traits and Values," in Manuel
•
B. Dy, Jr. (Ed.). values in
Philippine Culture and
Education: Philippine
Philosophical Studies, 1.
Washington, D.C.: The
Council for Re search in
Values and Philosophy:51-
54.
Reyes, Ramon Castillo
1989 Ground and Norm of
Morality: FJhics for College
Students. Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University
Press.
Shahani, Leticia Ramos.
1987. "AMoral Recovery Program:
Building a Nation, Inspiring
our People to Action."
Manila: Senate of the
Philippines.
..
University of the Philippines.
1970 Minutes of the University
Council's 242 n d Meeting.
April 6.
1995 Proposed Draft of the
Revised UP Charter, "An Act
to Enhance the Academic •
Freedom and Institutional
Autonomy of the University
of the Philippines."
Wren, Brian A.
1977 Education for Justice.
Maryknoll, New York: Orbis
•
..
' .