Can We Spare A Little Change?

by George Goking

It has been talked about so much, for so long. But it is very disappointing to see that nothing much has changed over the years. I am talking about the indifference towards the marginalized and poor. The walls that separate the better-off from the oppressed have been built so high up, that only a few of those who attempted to peep into the life of the sadder side of this world dare to crossover.

Life is not just for the few to enjoy. How many houses must a person have in order to live comfortably or how many 8,000 peso shoes must a person have in order to walk around the city without getting blisters? I’m pretty sure there are more significant ways of spending one’s surplus of money. If one has worked hard for his wealth, then of course, one has the right to enjoy it as he pleases. But this issue of poverty and the like isn’t getting any better. It surely doesn’t take a whole team to drill through concrete and dig through pipes and wires in order for the world to see the ugly truth that segments of society have to live with every day.
Many of us in the Ateneo were born lucky and will continue to live lucky for the rest of their lives. I have nothing against that, but we must not forget that there are people working in campus, sleeping right outside the gates of Ateneo, and probably people who sit right beside us in class that could certainly need our help in various ways that we can. I have been talking about money too much. Money is supposed to be a means to something else, not the ultimate end itself. The prosperity of the common good and the human race should be on the top of our list.

Every person has a unique set of capabilities that enables him/her to enjoy certain aspects of life that many/others may not have even imagined. It would be a shame if the truth were to end there. I believe that in life, there are many locked doors hidden right in front of our faces, but each door can only be unlocked by certain people. The possession of keys is not an exclusive privilege of the rich or the poor, both hold the same power, but for different realms. Similar to acquired knowledge from books, there is much to learn from the Other.

Keeping to ourselves is not a life well lived, and closing one’s doors to the certain sets of people is like having a disabled loved one wait in the car while the rest of the family eats lunch on a Sunday afternoon. Sympathizing for the poor won’t make this situation any better, and waiting for somebody else to do something about it is like waiting for a tumor to shrink on its own.


Life and its wonders are much better experienced when shared and depriving the many for the pleasures of the few is like eating all the cherries on your birthday cake because it’s your birthday (that’s just mean). Be good to your fellow men and be a jouissance’r for the world!

Hassle

by Wai Yiu So

“Il y a” as discussed by Doc G is a situation where there’s an indeterminacy of being, in the sense that beings are disintegrate into “no thing” --- that is neither nothing nor something. “Il y a” describes the lack of subjectivity, it’s the darkness that gives no orientation, no perspective, no meaning.

But “no meaning” doesn’t mean that the meaning does not exist.  “No orientation” doesn’t mean that there are no light in front of us… maybe we just closed our eyes.

Sometimes we close our eyes because it’s effortless, and can in some way wash away our problems. By closing our eyes we don’t have to worry about judgments from other people, we just have to be one of the people walking down the street. And because it’s so comfortable to be in the darkness and sleep, we have forgotten to search for the light. “Hassle eh.”

In the darkness we can’t see clearly even ourselves. In this darkness we don’t have any goal, and we are not going for anything. There’s no meaning and we are not going to find it. “Wala nga eh.”

So what do we mean by truly exist or be a being is to get out of our “Il y a”. To be able to get out of “Il y a”, to get out of the darkness and be unique, different, special, one needs to exert a great amount of effort and initiative. We have to take up the responsibility, and to exercise wisdom of love --- “what we can do for the Others?” Because what we have done define ourselves, so for us to really determine ourselves, we must first be Conscious-Beings-In-The-World-For-Others.

Of Kelly Clarkson, Darth Vader, and Levinas

by Victor Uy

I’m sure most – if not all – of us have encountered the phrase “the dark side”, be it through a song popularized by American Idol Kelly Clarkson, watching too much Star Wars, or what have you. However, aside from Ms. Clarkson and Darth Vader, Levinas also speaks of this “dark side” philosophically that is il y a. The question of ontology is that why there is something instead of nothing. Something and nothing are quite on both ends of the spectrum; but technically speaking, nothingness is unimaginable because in order to think of nothing, you must first think of something and actually erase that something to come up with nothing.

Having said that, because of the huge gap between something and nothing, this “dark side” – il y a – comes about. As human beings, it is quite a given fact that we want to become “something”, which will allow us to “be” and to achieve transcendence by being a neighbor, by loving the Other, and by being responsible.
Let’s give a more concrete example that’s closer to home. We are fortunate enough to have had the chance to experience an Atenean education. Albeit a lot of Ateneans are really diligent when it comes to academics, it is undeniable that a sizable chunk of the population has adapted the “petiks culture”. The “bahala na” attitude of some students often overpower their diligence so much so that they just go to school for the sake of going to school. Therefore, they are not really “student-ing” – they fall in between the something and the nothing. I also know of some people who aren’t really “happy” with the courses that they’re in. Sure, they go to classes, sit there for the whole duration of the session. Hence, physically, they’re present; but the real question is, are they really there? By being unhappy with their courses, they don’t really have a certain direction, priority or purpose; it’s like they’re robots that are preprogrammed to sit on a chair for hours and listen to professors – whether or not they are actually mentally present.

For a more graphic metaphor, imagine the walkers on the TV series The Walking Dead. They’re “alive”, but at the same time, they’re not alive. They walk endlessly without direction and/or purpose until some guy puts a gun against their heads and pulls the trigger.


Levinas asserts in his philosophy of Ethics the non-reciprocal relation of responsibility. We do what is good simply because it is good, and our lived experiences tell us so. To give an example, whenever we give gifts, we actually voluntarily share a part of ourselves. We give gifts because we want to give gifts. Upon giving these gifts, we don’t necessarily expect anything in return. Insofar as gifts are concerned, I believe that all of the people that fall under the descriptions in the preceding paragraph are very much capable of maximizing their gift that is the wisdom that they have acquired and are acquiring. However, they have the prerogative to make something of that wisdom. Education, in itself, is a gift, but its potential is entirely wasted if we choose not to accept it or to live out what wisdom we have acquired.

Questioning Him

by Polo Guillermo

There have been various calamities that have struck different places in the world. From intense earthquakes to heavy rainfalls due to typhoons, these types of natural disasters have unfortunately been a part of our daily lives. One that hits close to home was the recent super-typhoon Yolanda. A month has already passed yet victims of affected areas are still experiencing the aftermath of the storm. More than 10,000 people have been confirmed dead and thousands more are still missing. Infrastructures, livelihood and residences were wiped out completely destroyed.

At times of disasters, people tend to question why such things happen. People have been vocal about their complaints against government agencies for not having predicted the intensity of the super-typhoon and the efficiency of the precautionary measures that were instigated and planned by local government units. Some even berated the terms (storm surge) issued by PAGASA and media for allegedly it has caused confusion and apathy since people are not aware of this natural phenomenon is. People assumed that it was just like any other storm that would bring scattered rains. They never expected that such a catastrophe would actually take place.

There are also people who blame God for everything that has happened. They assume that these disasters happen because God is punishing us for all of our sins. Why would a merciful and loving God let his people suffer and consequently destroy His creations? Isn’t he an all-knowing supreme being capable of manipulating what is bound to happen in the world? It is during these times of discomfort, pain and suffering when people try to look for people to relate to or simply blame in order to lessen the grief of what they are experiencing and try to have some explanation to whatever they have dealt with. But is God really to be blamed for everything that has happened or does these disasters say something to humankind that is commonly ignored and taken for granted?

I believe in God but I cannot say that I have been the perfect Catholic. However, I have always believed that everything happens for a reason and that each event of our lives is a part of God’s greater plan for us. Some things may happen that might shake or hurt our faith but I think it’s just God’s way of testing our faith and commitment to Him. God let bad things happen for a reason but this does not necessarily mean that he enjoys seeing us suffer. Most of the time our judgment gets clouded by our initial and intense feelings at times of problems that causes us to not immediately realize or comprehend what is happening or the bigger picture. We forget to trust Him and believe in his greater plan. These realities only affirm Marcel’s view on ontological humility of human beings. There are things in our lives that are beyond our capacity to grasp and understand since we are finite beings. Each person in the society shares this finitude which becomes a certain sense of commonality that should bind and unite people all together.

Experts from the field of science have interpreted these events quite differently. Global warming has been an alarming environmental concern that continues to exacerbate as time goes by. Anthropological activities have been the most significant contributors to why it even started and continues to persist in the environment. Since we were capable of starting such a problem, logic would only imply that we also have the capacity and means to mitigate and eventually resolve it. This realization has been alive in environmentalists and concerned citizens from different parts of the world with their efforts of preserving the environment. This green movement and involvement of people in saving Mother Nature only underscore our nature as relation beings. The phenomenon of global warming proves that one’s action inevitably affects others and the entire society. Therefore, we must be more conscious with what we do and think of its consequences not only to ourselves, our neighbors but the environment as well.

At times of disasters, blaming people or even God will not help or change what has happened. Even if it is difficult or even impossible for some, we must try and learn how to trust God and His greater plan for us. Holding onto our faith can be a source of hope and strength at times of suffering. Events like these also call us to act as one unified and loving community in facing reality. At the end of the day, we are relational beings and we are our neighbor’s brother/sister.

The Irony of Innovation and the Death of Communication

by Polo Guillermo

Husserl has introduced the concept of the said and the saying. These terms underscore the importance of communication amongst individuals. The said pertains to the message or thought an individual wants to express and share to another person. The saying on the other hand is the manner how this thought is expressed and interpreted. There are instances when the said and the saying are directly proportional or are intimately intertwined. The said can be clearly reflected or implied by the saying. However, there are also instances when there is a disconnect between the two aforementioned concepts. The saying can be the opposite of the intention and content of the said. This can be done either intentionally and inadvertently.

More than the technicality of the definition and correlation of the two terms, Husserl asserts that the saying is more significant than the said. The said can be thought of and imitated by anyone. The saying on the other hand is a particular and unique experience which cannot be copied by anyone. Each encounter and conversation between two individuals is distinct. Husserl therefore gives more importance and meaning with how one interacts and connects with another person. This assertion affirms our nature as relational beings. We are defined by the relationships and interactions we have with other people. It is through communication that we build these linkages.

The innovation of technology has undeniably redefined communication. The invention of telephones and cellular phones has made it more convenient and accessible for people to keep in touch with people regardless of distance and time differences. These creations were initially intended connect people and make the world seem smaller. What is rather ironic is the fact that as time passed, it caused the opposite: technology marked the death of genuine communication, an interaction defined by a face to face exchange of words and ideas. Since instant messaging has made everything easier and faster, the younger generations unfortunately resort to these medium in establishing relationships with other people.

Leisurely talks and long conversations seem passé to most people now because of technology. This culture has unfortunately affected social skills of people for the worse. People have relatively become more aloof and uneasy with personal encounters because of the continued progression and advancement of gadgets. People don't normally establish eye contact as much and engage in conversations. They would rather isolate themselves in their own worlds in cyberspace. This mindset has created a generation who are dependent on gadgets to live and build relationships. This clearly undermines the assertion of Husserl that it is actually the interaction and manner of communication that is more important rather than the content of the conversation. More than anything else, it does not recognize the nature of people as beings conscious of others in the world.

I don't believe that the continued innovation of the field of technology directly equates to the death of communication. Its effects, may it be good or bad, depends on how we use them.

It is not bad to use these gadgets readily made available for us in order to make our lives more convenient. However, one should not be a slave of machinery to the point that one has to be in solitary confinement from the rest of the society.

The Beauty of Language

by Yza Siy

One of the most striking things that was said for me in the lecture last Thursday was how “ What’s important is the talking to and not just the about”. It is not all about knowledge and information but the acknowledgement talking to/ talking with another person brings forth.

I think this can be related to our past lecture on the concept of the Broken World that was presented by Gabriel Marcel. One of his central observations about life and experience in general is that we are living in this “Broken World”. Day in day out, we find ourselves too preoccupied with the daily grind that life brings. We tend to focus on our goals, our home works, tests or anything that distracts us reflecting and being-with-others.  We become too focused on what’s being said rather than to whom and how we say things.


The language that we began to master is a language that forgets what it means to have respect for the other. We forget that the beauty of language is that it allows us to understand not just the present but also something of the past and possibly future of the person we are talking to. Language is something intimate. As what was said in class, it is something capable of bringing out reality and I think this is something we all experience. We all meet different types of people and this particular someone tells us something. Whatever this person shared speaks of his past, possibly how this person will act in the future and therefore something of the present. With the simple act of talking with another person we are able to know the other in three ways and this experience plays as important role as to who we become. After all, who we are is a sum of all the people we’ve met and became acquainted with.

More Than The "I"

by Mara Cepeda

Last semester, we sought to answer the question, “Who am I?” We learned that we are embodied spirits, who exist not just because he is a cogito or a thinking “I,” but also because he has a body which physically manifests his existence in the world. We learned that our bodies are uniquely and intimately part of ourselves and that we cannot separate ourselves from it. At the same time, we learned that while we identify our bodily existence, we are more than our material body. This is because we have the capability to dream, to aspire, even to fight our own desires. We later on learned about being as in Being; our intentional awareness of our existence ultimately implies already that we exist and that we are trying to find our niche in the world.

I do not deny the importance of being aware of one’s existence. After all, it is but natural only for the human person to ask where he came from and what is the point of his life. Those kinds of questions make us human. However, like Levinas, I believe we cannot just stop there. Our quest to understand the reality of existence does and cannot end within ourselves. We cannot put ourselves in a corner by believing that the one I wrote above constitutes the whole of existence already. We have already gone past that kind of thinking.

I therefore think that Levinas wanted to change philosophy’s gears not because it was completely wrong, but because, as we have learned in class, it was leading us to another road block. It was leading us to think that existence is a journey taken alone. What’s worse is that it is leading us to believe that the world operates and is defined by the same terms as we see it to be. “This is how I see things. We can’t you do the same?” We were at risk of building a shell around ourselves and calling that the world, when in fact, what we should have been doing is continually breaking that shell and letting the world in, not blocking it out of ourselves.

“No man is an island,” says John Donne. And indeed, once you are aware that you are capable of asking “Who am I?” you will become aware that you are also capable of answering an even more fundamental question of “Who am I, and what does the Other demand from me?”

What I’m saying is, once you have started to understand one’s existence, you also become aware of the other beings doing the same thing around you – they are also existing like you, they are also finding their places in the world, they are also trying to find the point of their individual existence. But while you have that similarity with other beings, there is also the difference – they have different personal histories from you, they have perspectives separate from what you have. In the similarity, there is the difference; there is the difference in the similarity. With that awareness, therefore, we realize that it’s not enough to ask the point of our individual existence; we must also ask what we can and should do with that existence. When we do that, we allow ourselves to be driven out of the corner and towards the openness that is existence.

For example, it is not enough that we know as Ateneans the Ateneo’s philosophy of being men and women of others. It is not enough that we know we are made to serve others; rather, we literally must seek to serve others. We literally must become men and women for others. In my case, my being an Atenean is not just characterized by my ID number nor just by my utterances of “St. Ignatius of Loyola, pray for us.” My being an Atenean is also manifested whenever I become a neighbor, say for example to my sister, when I help her in her math homework even when I have to study for a theology quiz as well.

Levinas perhaps found the need to shift philosophy’s gears so that our individual existence will not be in vain, so that our individual existence will be more, so that our individual existence will be for the Other.

Random Act of Kindness

by Christian Gallardo

Although helping others might seem to be such a good deed, there are times wherein it does not feel right to do it not because it is not what conscience dictates but because the society perceives it in a wrong way. No matter how many books are published praising people who do kind acts to another, in reality, it is still socially awkward. Just imagine seeing a politician in a public television distributing relief goods to those people affected by the typhoon. The act itself is right, but the real intent is being judged by others. While others might see it as a way to also encourage others to donate, the same act might be judged as a way for the politician to gain votes for the upcoming elections.

Personally though, I experienced the same situation- of being stuck between doing good while risking my dignity in the process and doing nothing just to be safe. Back when I was in high school, I used to ignore my teachers who carry their heavy bags with laptops and test papers not because I do not want to waste my energy and time in helping them, but I worry that my batch mates would judge me as a “teacher’s pet” who helps my professor, hoping that, in return, they would favour me in grades giving. Recently as well, like 2 to 3 weeks ago, my friends and I ate at KFC in Katipunan. Before we got there to have lunch, it was actually sunny. Unfortunately though, before we left, it rained so hard. Good thing that we did not forget our umbrellas. Though there are 2 pretty girls from Miriam College (I assume because of the uniforms they were wearing) that forgot to have their umbrellas with them. My friends and I overheard that they just wanted to go to Fully Booked (which is just on the other side of the street) to wait for the rain to stop but they do not have something to protect themselves from the heavy rain. My friends and I pushed each other to approach the ladies and offer them an umbrella to the other side of the street, which is on our way back to school anyway. Though none of us had the courage to, not because we were insensitive, but because we worry that the people around us, including those 2 girls, might think that we are flirting, since they are indeed pretty. Hence, we just rushed back to school, pretending that we did not hear a thing on their conversation.

Thinking back on the situation, and relating it to the philosophical discussion that we had on school, I guess helping them would be fall into the type of a “random act of kindness”. And from the situation I can imply that what makes them special is that you are willing to risk your dignity- of being judged by others, just to do something that what you feel is right. Furthermore, the difference of which from the other acts of goodness is that it is not obliged or enforced by law, rather you do it really because you feel personally that it is right. Take, as comparison, the situation of buying something from a store. The moment that the good you bought is handed over to you, you have a legal obligation to give the payment. Breaking this obligation would result into a legal violation which would result, in turn, into punishment of some sorts. On the other hand, not doing a “random act of kindness” (which we unfortunately did) would not result into punishments. Because of this we can imply that “random acts of kindness” involve some kind of conscience and knowledge. Legal obligations, since they are forced, are automatically exercised most of the times. Contrary to these, “random acts of kindness” makes one reflect first: “Should I do this? Should I do that?” And that reflection makes the act of goodness more human.


Thinking back on what happened that day, I think that we should have helped. After all, none can ascertain our intentions but ourselves anyway.

Equivalence

by Patrick Cruz

I remember one particular time during enrolment for this incoming semester. It happened when I had a lot of things to fix and the sun was directly above me. Just as any other person crossing on the bridge at that time, I was bad-tempered and hurrying in order to finish the tasks early.  But suddenly, there was one child vendor who offered for me to buy turon. Just as I had turned my head back and I was about to say my most common response “no, thank you,” there I saw his innocent face with an angelic smile. He even added, “sige na po, hindi pa po kasi kamina nakakain e.” “How could I refuse to such offer?”, I said to myself. So, I bought two from him. Since I was full at that time and knowing he’s also hungry, then, I give these to him. There, he smiled again and said “Salamat po!”

It was completely an event for me, an encounter with another person. It might have been a surprise, or it might have actually been there all the time and it just took some refreshed minds in order to see this in a different perspective. For me, this is what Dr. Garcia calls random act of kindness—that even when no one is looking at you, you actually made that choice to enter into another person’s life. It is the moment of extension of a hand that could’ve renewed that child vendor’s hope. It is a time when one allows the poor to feel rich, the hungry to feel full, the desperate to feel hopeful and everyone to feel loved.

Boring or Not?

by Arvi Calagui

First of all, I’m going to say, here and now, that reflection was the last thing on my mind ever since I’ve started taking my studies seriously. Back in high school, the main pattern I did to get by was to read the required text, familiarize myself with the important points that might spring out of the quizzes, and then forget about them afterwards. In fact, I tend to memorize my friends’ funny stories and I never forget them almost word for word up until today, and these are the things that I don’t even need for school. Basically, I like remembering and experiencing fun stuff because it makes my life carefree and removes all the tension I may have. As for reading very serious texts, I’ve always thought that thinking about them so much would make them even more boring. And in reflection, lived experiences are further analyzed in a deeper way, which I thought was destroying the experience itself because of how reflection turns it into a boring textbook article.

Now I am in college, and have discovered that a deeper understanding of texts is prioritized over memorization (though it is still a part of it). My original pattern no longer worked (specifically to my English and literature classes). At first, I never really understood how reflection really works in writing papers and such. I just typed anything I could find in a text that seemed important and gave my understanding about them word per word. But gradually, I realized how to do it right. I am not supposed to just let my mind come out and look for information that I need, I am also supposed to let it comeback, or simply to use the things I have gathered and look at them in a deeper sense, seeing them not just in their written form, but on what they really want to convey. And before you say it, yes, the metaphor I just used is derived from the one said in class. Reflection is a process of coming out and coming back. Not just to read or experience, but to analyze and understand beyond the senses.

Given that philosophy and theology classes focus more on lived experiences that can be incorporated in readings, reflection is obviously an important aspect in studying them. My old-school definition of reflection before was something like “to read, to understand, or to make it seem like I understand”, but no more. My past notion that reflection makes my life and everything boring is also long gone because I realized that there is a point. I can’t just lead myself to stop at “this happened and “that happened”. I need to go further and realize that these things are happening around me. Both good things and bad things are happening around me. They are not just events that I am watching from a distance, but they are events that I am involved in because they happen in this world, and I belong to this world.

Reading books or doing other stuff (watching movies, playing games, etc.), and reflecting on them do turn up some very interesting stuff. Reflection is not boring after all. SO now I can conclusively say that reflection is one of the things that comes to mind when I live my life.