JONBERT M.

CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
HISTORY OF THE PHILOSOPHY/SOCIAL SCIENCES
Question:
Why philosophy has a different context in the Philippines?
Answer:
Because Filipino philosophy is anchored to the Filipino Values. We always see/ anchor ourselves in our
situation but not our situatedness. It is seeing oneself in a given situation i.e. the mother only sees herself
as a mother which disregards her situautedness as a human person and thus disregarding ones being.
Though a large part of not developing a Filipino philosophy can be blamed to Jose Rizal for creating
Pilosopo Tasyo, it is highlighted and justified that the Filipinos have already created an image of the
Pilosopo who is defined by the society. This must not progress because a Philosopher must be
someone who defines the society.
Question:
In what way did philosophy changed in each historical epoch?
Answer:
The philosophical epochs are ancient, medieval, modern and postmodern. Each era has a different
approach and themes in philosophy and is usually based on the current trends and way of life of the
people. This caused the changes in the focus of philosophy. The revolutions in the concepts thought
about in philosophy is perhaps caused by the death of proponents, change in leadership and
significant historical events where in the end are politically moved. However, we classify these
differences as follows:
ERA:
Context:
Focus:

Ancient
Cosmocentric
Universe

Medieval

Theocentric
God

Modern
Anthropocentric
Man

Postmodern
Animistic
Play

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
THE MARXIAN THEORY OF SOCIETY
Question:
How did Marx and Engels looked into human societies?
Answer:
Marx and Engels summarized history of human development in four stage where each stage is
characterized by different technologies of production and different class relationships. The first stage,
Primitive Communism, in which hunters and gatherers made use of communal natural resources with
tools so simple that they were not essentially different from a persons clothing or household goods. In
short, there was no significant exclusionary private property in the means of production and,
therefore, no class structure. Marx has a contention that this stage is closest to communism because
it was, in his view, a classless society. Slavery followed where man had an increase in the ability to
produce, but on the negative side where class differentiation started to emerge. This is possible
because of private ownership and the exploitation of one class by another. In the third stage,
Feudalism, social and economic organization was more complex, reflecting the development of more
advanced production technologies, but class and property relationships remained essentially the
same. So too in the fourth or current stage, Capitalism: the propertyless labourer is no longer a slave or
a serf, he sells his labour power in a free market, but he is exploited none the less, and this exploitation
cannot end until yet another stage dawns.
Question:
What is the dialectical approach?
Answer:
Marx presents a complex and still relevant analysis of the historical basis of inequality in capitalism and
how to change it. Among these thoughts was the dialectical approach that Marx derived from Hegel
and that shapes all of Marxs work. The important point here is that Marx believed that society is
structured around contradictions that can be resolved only through actual social change. One of the
primary contradictions that Marx looked at was between human potential (nature) and the conditions
for labor in capitalism. For Marx, human nature is intimately tied to labor, which both expresses and
transforms human potential. Under capitalism, our labor is sold as a commodity, and the conversion of
our labor to commodities leads to alienation from our productive activity, from the objects that we
make, from our fellow workers, and even from ourselves.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
REACTION PAPER:
PANOPTICON AND UTILITARIANISM
As a major concept, Michel Foucault believed in the liberty of the people. He also pointed out
that as individuals, we react to situations in different ways. His writings are vehicle to show the various
factors that interact and collide in his analysis of change and its effects. As a philosophical historian
and an observer of human relations, his work focused on the dominant genealogical and
archaeological knowledge systems and practices, tracking them through different historical eras,
including the social contexts that were in place that permitted change - the nature of power in society.
He wrote that power "reaches into the very grain of individuals, touches their bodies and inserts itself
into their actions and attitudes, their discourses, learning processes and everyday lives" (Foucault,
1980).
Foucault is interested in the way that knowledge gives birth to technologies that exert power.
He cited the Panopticon, an architectural design put forth by Jeremy Bentham in the mid-19th Century
for prisons, insane asylums, schools, hospitals, and factories. A Panopticon is a structure that gives
officials the possibility of complete surveillance of criminals. In fact, officials need not always be present;
the mere existence of the structure constrains criminals. The Panopticon might take the form of a tower
in the center of a circular prison from which guards could see into all cells. The Panopticon is a
tremendous source of power for prison officials because it gives them the possibility of total surveillance.
More important, its power is enhanced because the prisoners come to control themselves; they stop
themselves from doing various things because they fear that they might be seen by the guards. There
is a clear link here among knowledge, technology, and power. Furthermore, Foucault returns to his
concern for the human sciences, for he sees the Panopticon as a kind of laboratory for the gathering
of information about people. It was the forerunner of the social-scientific laboratory and other socialscience techniques for gathering information about people. At still another level, Foucault sees the
Panopticon as the base of a whole type of society the disciplinary society.
The truth is we are already living in a postpanopticon age where surveillance is an accepted
norm, like our communication in the internet. But here we see that value of utilitarianism seeking for the
happiness of the greatest number can be found in the model of society inspired by the Panopticon. I
have always believed in the definition that power is the ability to make people do what you want them
to do. One becomes powerful if he has the ability to influence the behaviour of other people. Foucault
wrote that power "reaches into the very grain of individuals, touches their bodies and inserts itself into
their actions and attitudes, their discourses, learning processes and everyday lives". In the concept of
Panopticon, one does well because he is under surveillance and the doing of good comes in a
voluntary package. Thus, the peoples voluntary acceptance produces a series of good deeds where
it creates an impression of general society whose behaviour is in control and positive. If such kind of
behaviour is present, we serve for the happiness of others and a moral brand of people becomes
existent.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
POLITICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
Question:
What are the features of political philosophy of Hobbes?
Answer:
These three are philosophers of the enlightenment era. Their philosophies are mainly interested with the
existing governmental institution and politics. This, I think, made them more known as political theorists
and philosophers. But what made them think/ philosophize about it can be traced down to the history
of France (Europe) where the king rules by absolute monarchy. It means that the Kings authority comes
from God and the king tells people what to do and makes sure that there are doing what they
supposed to do. Enlightenment came up in the 17th century, where started challenging the
institutionalized system. Thomas Hobbes is the first important modern writer to argue that the basis of
social order is a contract. If men were in a state of nature, says Hobbes, their reason would tell them
what they must do to establish a government. They must enter into a covenant or contract with one
another to give up their freedom to engage in violence and other features of the war of every man
against every man in order to create a general authority that will have the exclusive right and power
to apply coercive force. Fear provides the motive, but reason provides the means, suggesting articles
of peace, upon which men may be drawn to agreement. This springing out of the notion that man is
basically evil and selfish.
Question:
What were the key points of Montesquieus analysis of the English political system?
Answer:
Montesquieu, in his analysis of the English political system, focused on its legislative and executive
chambers. He did not consider the role of the courts in guarding them civic rights. He had this thought
that the judiciary can and must be a part of the executive. It is detrimental for the other two branches
no having separation of powers and checks and balances. According to Montesquieu, if legislative
and executive functions were performed by the same persons, there would be an end then of liberty.
The English constitution does even more to protect it by dividing the legislative branch into two bodies,
which check one another by the mutual privilege of rejecting the proposals of each. Anticipating an
argument that was later to be brought against the notion of political equilibrium, Montesquieu here
adds that this arrangement does not result in stalemate; it requires only that the legislative and
executive bodies of the state must move in concert. Obviously, Montesquieus concept of
separation is not meant to denote an arrangement of independent powers but, indeed, the
opposite; he explicitly notes that the preservation of liberty requires the executive and legislative
organs of the state to be dependent on each another. It is not separation that protects political liberty,
but the arrangement of the separated powers in an equilibrium mechanism of mutual dependence.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
FRENCH POSITIVISM AND THE BEGINNINGS OF SOCIOLOGY
Question:
What is meant by positivism?
Answer:
The English word positivism is derived from the French word positivism which means imposed on the
mind by experience. Positivism refers to the philosophy of science that asserts that the only source of
trustworthy knowledge is the information obtained from rational conducts and reports of sensory
experience. The concept of empirical evidence or the established data received thru the senses, is
important in positivism. The French sociologist Auguste Comte is considered the Father of Positivism
when he asserted in the early 19th century that society, like the physical world, operates according to
absolute laws, and that it is the duty of the sociologists to discover these laws in order to understand
the nature of the society.
Question:
What is the role of the government according to the positivist?
Answer:
There are points of disagreement between Comte and Saint-Simons view on the role of government,
probably brought by the ambiguity of the latter. The state is strengthened in its powers and enlarged
in the scope of its duties, becoming in fact authoritarian and totalitarian in the fullest senses of those
terms. This harmony will be possible only thru force. A number of institutions are potent instruments
through which force can be exercised, all of which emanates from the state. Comte recognized only
one political philosopher of significance in the twenty-two centuries that had elapsed between
Aristotle and himselfThomas Hobbes. The direction in which the positive political philosophy was
going, however, surprised other known philosophers. Like most French scholars he was interested in
finding a solution to the chaos of the French Revolution. He was heavily influenced by the study of the
natural sciences. Comte said sociologists could use similar methods to uncover laws that govern the
operation of society.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC/ JOURNAL ANALYSIS:
RISE OF THE AGE OF SCIENCE
Question:
How the Scientific Attitude did became a foundation of social science?
Answer:
Time came when scepticism became a scientific attitude were empirical investigation is not
always true and data must be interpreted not only by the top ranks in hierarchical authority but by all.
This revolution led to Intellectual freedom where they realized that man is rational and therefore
capable of free enjoyment of his life and especially his thoughts. The social sciences were inspired by
the achievements of the natural sciences and attempted to relate human sociality with the new
concepts of the natural sciences using in the method of investigation of natural phenomena. They
used these methods in order to study the history of social science, and appreciate its philosophic
problems. They believed that ideas and theories are necessarily associated with individual persons
since these are mental phenomena. But when a set of ideas or theories are widely shared, they form
part of the culture of the community, they become social phenomena and get out of its being a
mental state.
Question:
Did Homeric view contributed to the development of social science?
Answer:
If the Homeric view of the world were correct, we could not discover any laws of nature
because there would be none that could not be broken or altered by the desires, or whims, of the
gods. Whatever happens to humans and social events are the will of the gods. The best we could
do would be to psychoanalyse the gods in order to understand how they behaved; which is in fact
what the Homeric poems concern themselves with when the narrative seeks to provide some
explanation of events. The natural sciences have extracted themselves altogether from the Homeric
view. The modern physicist, or chemist, or biologist, regards phenomena as explicable in terms of laws
of nature, which are not subject to alteration by either human or supernatural powers. The laws of
nature furnish the explanation of why a cannonball will fall dropped from a height, and why a bird will
not. The flight of the bird is not contrary to the laws of nature, but in accordance with them.
It was due time that the social sciences went deeper and tried to explain why the actions have
the results they do?. Hence, the application of scientific theories became necessary to investigate on
social phenomena. However, this becomes difficult because of the established moral standards and
judgments.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
SOCIALITY AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Question:
How imperfect enculturation becomes a constructive source of cultural change?
Answer:
Scott Gordon pointed out that most societies are not able to mould the young into complete adoption
of traditional values, beliefs, and codes conduct. This is what he called imperfect enculturation which
gives birth to deviants. He said that deviation may be dysfunctional for the society but other forms of
deviation are constructive sources of cultural change. Using the cases of many thinkers who thought
about the earth and philosophers who taught about man, he was able to explain that it is not only
wars, natural calamities and migration that can bring about social change. Social and cultural change
can also spring from artistic and intellectual innovations where the innovators first became victims of
disbelief by the people but later became among the roster of the founders of great schools of thoughts.
May I also present the case of prostitution being among the most popular forms of deviance. Many
have thought about the negative impact of such in the society influencing the younger generations,
causing destruction of the families, contributing to spread of sexually transmitted disease and
demoralizing men and women of the hospitality industry. But how come that some society permits it;
impliedly protecting it if the laws do not allow? The answer is because it permits people to have a job
with minimal qualifications. It permits an economic boom by selling out liquor, hospitality services,
tourism and others. And most importantly, it stays because some people need it. After the society
justifies all this, it could then legalize it and provide for social change. Like in the case of Las Vegas
which is now a major city in the world providing for entertainment services and Amsterdam, now
branded as the sex capital of the world.
Question:
What is limited gregariousness? Does being limited makes it a social problem?
Answer:
Scott Gordon used the paradigm of the sheep put by the farmer in the field. The flock of the sheep if
considered to be a society that interacts not merely as an aggregation and is already satisfied by
apparent preference to physical closeness.
He stood on the notion that man are gregarious in nature but do not associate with one another in
ways that embrace all the members of the species in a particular area. In short, he put on a notion
that humans discriminate. This means that humans have the tendency to consider similarity in dealing
and associating with others like occupation, religion, status etc. Scott Gordon already pointed out
that this limited gregariousness is not in itself a social problem but can give rise to conflict and hostility
that are dysfunctional for the society.
When the K12 curriculum was implemented in the Philippines, there was a notable decrease in the
public school enrolment because students and parents believed that private education can bring out
the best in the students through its facilities and capabilities in delivering the senior high school tracks.
What happened is that the poor remained in the public school and those who can afford are now in
private institution. But this seems be more favourable since the rich are with their own kind and same
with the poor who are with their fellow poor. But we can see further that the K12 curriculum have
defined the boundaries of the economic standing of the people. The problem is when this gave rise to
discrimination where the poor feels very poor and the rich feels superior over them.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC/ JOURNAL ANALYSIS:
RISE OF THE AGE OF SCIENCE
Question:
How the Scientific Attitude did became a foundation of social science?
Answer:
Time came when scepticism became a scientific attitude were empirical investigation is not
always true and data must be interpreted not only by the top ranks in hierarchical authority but by all.
This revolution led to Intellectual freedom where they realized that man is rational and therefore
capable of free enjoyment of his life and especially his thoughts. The social sciences were inspired by
the achievements of the natural sciences and attempted to relate human sociality with the new
concepts of the natural sciences using in the method of investigation of natural phenomena. They
used these methods in order to study the history of social science, and appreciate its philosophic
problems. They believed that ideas and theories are necessarily associated with individual persons
since these are mental phenomena. But when a set of ideas or theories are widely shared, they form
part of the culture of the community, they become social phenomena and get out of its being a
mental state.
Question:
Did Homeric view contributed to the development of social science?
Answer:
If the Homeric view of the world were correct, we could not discover any laws of nature
because there would be none that could not be broken or altered by the desires, or whims, of the
gods. Whatever happens to humans and social events are the will of the gods. The best we could
do would be to psychoanalyse the gods in order to understand how they behaved; which is in fact
what the Homeric poems concern themselves with when the narrative seeks to provide some
explanation of events. The natural sciences have extracted themselves altogether from the Homeric
view. The modern physicist, or chemist, or biologist, regards phenomena as explicable in terms of laws
of nature, which are not subject to alteration by either human or supernatural powers. The laws of
nature furnish the explanation of why a cannonball will fall dropped from a height, and why a bird will
not. The flight of the bird is not contrary to the laws of nature, but in accordance with them.
It was due time that the social sciences went deeper and tried to explain why the actions have
the results they do?. Hence, the application of scientific theories became necessary to investigate on
social phenomena. However, this becomes difficult because of the established moral standards and
judgments.

JONBERT M. CAOLI
MAT SS
AUTODIDACTIC:
UTILITARIANISM
Question:
What was the impact of Benthams utilitarian view of happiness to the legal system?
Answer:
Bentham was known in expressing the criterion of the good being the greatest happiness of the
greatest number of people/ members of the society. Accordingly, it applies not only to the social
institutions, but to all aspects of the society including the practice of government and laws. Since
Bentham was among those who revolutionize philosophy during his time, his valuing gets to the root of
a philosophical question and used the methods of the physical sciences; converting it to philosophic
methods. During his times, among the interesting questions were mostly about religion and the
achieving and sustaining social order.
Specifically, Bentham dealt with the problems of social order not by igniting a revolution to
overthrow institutionalized policies and organization, but attacking the system with philosophical
challenges. Subjects of Benthams were confronted on demonstrating their contributions to the
general welfare; that which the central theme of Jeremy Benthams utilitarianism is.
Though, the legal system was less affected by utilitarianism, philosophical radicalism pushed
questions re: legal theory and practice leading to reforms. Benthams contention that public policies
must be judged in terms of the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people led to the
proposition that punishment inflicted upon criminals is only by a greater benefit to others.
Consequently, it directed one to look at the practice of justice where punishment is justified to be
proper in correcting criminal acts. While it is perceived that utilitarianism is somewhat possessing a
common sense character, it was able to obtain popular support since it doesnt connect itself to any
religious or political doctrine.
Question:
What was Mills point in saying that to know the truth is insuffiecient?
Answer:
I am fascinated with the quote it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better
to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. This I think is related to the Mills declaration that to
know the truth is insufficient.John Stuart Mill argued that of all philosophical errors is the belief that
truth is already known, especially with regard to moral and social questions. Progress, according to
him, can be achieved only by the advocacy of new ideas and the critical judgment to established
beliefs that forms our concepts of truths. This means that no truth can be arrived at without the facts
being purified by intellectual criticism and discourse. This is from the thought that truth can never be
pure. In respect to moral issues it can appeal only to one who is blessed by the possession of philosophic
doubt. In my understanding, doubting the certainties of a fact produces universal validity if it
undergone the stage of being a proposition of fact and value judgment. Thus, in the words of Gordon,
to know the truth, then, is insufficient: criticism, even to the point of heresy, serves to complement it; it
vitalizes truth, keeping it abloom with the freshness and energy of youth.