GOOD MANNERS AND RIGHT CONDUCT

INTRODUCTION

Good manner can be characterized as carrying on well with affability and

courteousness to indicate right open conduct to the general population living in the public
eye. A portion of the good manners resemble courteous, humble, well-cultured, polite and
respectful social conduct found in few people. Any of the men or ladies are recognized and
perceived in the general public by good manners. An individual is known in the general
public for his knowledge as well as for his conduct and manners.

Good manners are extremely important in our day to day and each parent must show
their kids the good manners and significance of them throughout everyday life. Good
manners are required to make successful communication with companions and in addition,
establish a good connection on them. It encourages us to stay positive for the duration of the
day. We should utilize the enchantment words like “excuse me”, “thank you”, “please”,
“sorry”, and so forth at whatever point required without motivating late so as to keep up a
cheerful relationship. Guardians must push their children to basically practice such words to
act well in regular day to day existence. These words demonstrate the sentiment of grieved,
cheerful, thankfulness and regard to the general population.

Good manner opens the way to new discussion with individuals and openings
throughout everyday life. In the event that somebody converses with you with impoliteness,
do not talk to him in his way, simply talk to him in your method for carrying on well as
discourteousness makes rudeness. Practicing good manners is important to be an incredible
and honorable identity in the general public. It keeps up the inspiration in our spirit and brain.
Our good conduct demonstrates our optimal power of character. We should demonstrate
regard and adoration to individuals to make positive cooperation.

Good manners are critical for accomplishment throughout everyday life. Man, today
is for sure hard in a hurry. However, it is not something that remains in his direction. Despite
what might be expected it guarantees a considerably more solid connection, a better ground
for him to create solidity. It is the backbone of human relationship.

When congress sees it fit to pass a measure that aims to teach the youth proper
conduct, something must be terribly amiss.

Has there been a breakdown in good manners that the august lawmakers have to step
in? Have the young Filipinos become notoriously ill-mannered that a bill on the teaching of
good conduct has to be approved?

Why did we stop teaching Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) in schools as a
subject in the first place? Was it because we thought that children could learn ethics and good
behavior from home, their peers and from the infrequent admonitions or headshakes of their
teachers?

Some children may learn civility from their parents, elders or from their community if
they are surrounded by people steeped in good behavior. But, apparently, majority of young
people are exposed to ill manners, rude conduct, and sometimes violent behavior. These
children need immersion, in the form of a regular lessons, to ensure that proper conduct and
good behavior are imparted to them—conduct that they will follow and observe, hopefully,
their entire lives.

For a disciplined nation, it is important that lessons on good conduct are given at a
young age. GMRC lessons should be hammered starting in kindergarten and through. They
are more likely to grow well-mannered if they have lessons on right conduct in their
formative years.

However, teachers should remember that the young children also tend to copy or
mimic what they see in their elders and in the persons of authority. Thus, it is important for
educators, school officials and other personnel to practice what is being preached inside
classrooms and by showing good manners always.

A teacher who gives lessons on good behavior would not be credible and would not
set a bad example if he or she were ill-mannered outside the role models if they display
improper or criminal behavior in public.

Also, school personnel should be aware that good manners should not only be taught
by whoever was assigned to teach GMRC. All teachers and all school staff are mentors when
it come3s to this aspect.

The GMRC seeds sown in kindergarten and elementary will grow and bloom if these
lessons continue until high school. With values education, students will learn the virtues of
patience, perseverance, industry, honesty, and integrity, among others.

They will also learn how to respect the laws, their elders, and other people. Lessons
on nationalism will teach them to love and help motherland. Lesson on peace and justice,
diversity, gender equity and love of nature are also important if we were intelligent, smart,
law abiding, and well-mannered citizens.

In the long run, the country will benefit from disciplined and ethical society. Clearly,
students need to learn good manners early on in their schooling for them to imbibe and
practice acceptable behavior in life.
 OVERVIEW OF THE SUBJECT

GMRC Removed as a Regular Subject

According to Tita C. Valderama, of the Manila Times, July 2, 2018, “removing the
subject Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) from the basic education curriculum 16
years ago was a mistake.

The intention was to integrate GMRC in all learning areas, but it failed. What
happened was that GMRC, or Character Education, which was one of the original subjects in
the Philippine Educational System was established in 1901, took a backseat.

According to the Global Peace Foundation, an international, non-sectarian

organization that promotes an innovative values-based approach to peace-building, character
education found its place back in the elementary and high school curriculum in 2005.

But then in spite of the efforts to develop the character of learners, it noted “evident
decline in morality, honesty, discipline, respect, civility, and responsibility in our midst—in
the family, in society, in government, even in schools.”

It concurred in the observation that “conventional education is incomplete when it

comes to nurturing the character and personality of the students.”

I started schooling on the year martial law was imposed. I grew up in an environment
where parents and grandparents were quite strict in making sure that children respected and
followed their elders in words and action. Impolite children were punished or spanked.
Cursing was a big no, and so was answering back. Praying the rosary and the Angelus was a
daily ritual. GMRC was taught both at home and in school.

But when the subject was removed in the formal education curriculum, its teaching at
home apparently lost its attraction as well.

To the not-so-young generation who grew up learning GMRC in school, it sounded

good when news came out recently that the Department of Education (DepEd) is considering
it bringing back.

The values of integrity, loyalty, honesty, respect, patriotism, and nationalism must be
ingrained in the minds and character of young people. This is a way of empowering the
youth to become responsible citizens and future leaders of the country.

With so many factors that can influence children’s values in the modern age, the
education curriculum ought to include effective interventions in shaping the character of
young people so they do not become stupid human beings.

This DepEd initiative to integrate GMRC will, of course, be more significant if

government leaders show great examples of good character to the younger generations.
 The DepEd’s plan to reintegrate GMRC in the basic education curriculum is laudable.
But its impact would be stronger all of us would be reminded of the teachings in character
education.

According to DepEd RO2 officials during a Press Conference on November 29, 2019
in Tuguegarao, City, Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) was not removed but
enhanced in a different approach.

Amir Aquino, Regional Information Officer said that it was strengthened by being
taught in every subject. It does not mean that GMRC was dissolved and we do not teach
values anymore. Even in other subject, you can still integrate values, he added.

Aquino also said it starts with the family and the teachers are the ones’ that
supplement discipline. The parents are involved in this. We should help one another to
become effective.

It was also emphasized that DepEd has zero tolerance in any misconduct of
both learners and teachers. “We make sure that we address every issue regarding the attitude
of the learners even our own teachers.

Good Manners and Right Conduct Possibly Return

Meanwhile, Senators vowed to expedite the passage into law of the measure
that would institutionalize the teaching of values education and good manners and right
conduct (GMRC) law.

The bill seeks to revive the teaching of values formation and GMRC as a separate
subject to teach students the practical and acceptable manners of conducting daily affairs
according to universal norms of ethics and morality.

In the old curriculum of the basic education program, a subject entitled “good
Manners and Right Conduct” or GMRC, is part of the regular basic education curriculum.

Subsequently, it was scrapped as a regular subject integrated in Social Studies and

other related subjects.

Joint Push to Restore GMRC Subject in Schools

According to the Manila Inquirer, Senator Panfilo M. Lacson has filed a bill seeing to
restore the teaching of Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) in all schools nationwide.
GMRC has been removed from the schools’ curriculum when the K to 12 Program was
implemented.

Under Lacson’s Senate Bill 1185, GMRC would be taught during children’s
formative years from Kindergarten to Grade 3. The Veteran lawmaker argued that teaching
GMRC as a separate subject is needed especially since many young Filipinos are already
exposed to the negative influences of technology.

“In order to create a balance, it is necessary for our educational system to aid Filipino
family in imparting good manners and right conduct to our young students by its inclusion in
the curriculum at the beginning of their school years,” Lacson said, noting how modern
technology threatens to impact the social skills and manners of Filipino youth.

Under the proposed measure, the curriculum would also focus on the basics of GMRC
including caring for oneself, giving concern for others, according to proper respect to people,
upholding discipline and order, cultivating sincerity, honesty, obedience, and love for
country.

“Taking into account the Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao curriculum of the Department

of Education’s K-12 program, the Good Manners and Right Conduct is hereby
institutionalized and shall be designated as separate subject to be taught in Kindergarten to
Grade 3 levels,” Lacson said in his bill.

He added the teaching method shall be actual or situational instead of just conceptual,
so students can directly relate to the lessons and practice them.

Other senators have also filed separate bills seeking to restore GMRC in the school
curriculum. Among them were Senator Sherwin Gatchalian, Juan Miguel “Migs” Zubiri, and
Joel Villanueva.

Revival of Subject on Good Manners and Right Conduct Sought

Lawmakers want good manners and right conduct to be taught in schools, given the
manner by which Filipinos lead their lives.

On October 29, 2019, by Epi Fabonan of the Philippine STAR—Amid the

deteriorating state of Filipino values and manners, a new bill was sponsored in the Senate that
aims to integrate Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) in the Edukasyon sa
Pagpapakatao (ESP) subject in the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum.

Senate Bill (SB) No. 860, also known as the Comprehensive Values Education Act,
was authored and sponsored by Sen. Joel Villanuev.

In his sponsorship speech for the bill, Villanueva said, “We can’t discount the fact
that values education or (ESP) is already included in the Department of Education (DepEd)
curriculum, yet, there is a clamor for the revival of GMRC in the curriculum, and this clamor
is indeed proper, given the realities that we observe in our manners of conducting the affairs
of the various aspects of our daily lives as Filipinos.”

“Values education embraces the whole person. That’s why our version of the bill recognizes
that the present values education curriculum is incomplete; and it is for this reason that we
propose the inclusion of the teaching of GMRC) and of character-building activities in values
education curriculum,” he added.

Villanueva’s bill mandates the DepEd to revise its curriculum for the ESP subject to
include GMRC as well as “clear, distinct, specific and concrete character-building activities.”

Moreover, the bill wants the curriculum expanded to completely cover all grade levels
from Kindergarten to Grade 12. Under the current K to 12 Curriculum for ESP, the subject is
taught only from Kindergarten to Grade 10.

Another salient feature of the bill is the requirement to use the mother tongue in
teaching values education. It asks the DepEd to work with the commission on the Filipino
language to develop a multilingual framework for teaching the subject in several mother
languages.

Currently, Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) is

implemented only from Kindergarten to Grade 3, with English and Filipino becoming the
official language instruction from Grade 4.

(The DepEd currently uses 19 languages in MTB-MLE: Tagalog, Capampangan, Pangasinan,

Iloko, Bikol, Ybanag, Sinugbuanong, Binisaya, Hiligaynon, Waray, Bahasa Sug,
Maguindanaoan, Maranao, Chavacano, Ivatan, Sambal, Akianon, Kiniray-a, Yakan, and
Sinurigaonon.)

Once the bill is passed, ESP subjects from Grades 4 to 12 will have to be taught in the
respective mother tongues as well. Regarding character-building activities, Villanueva said
these may include immersion, exposures, outreach activities, and community service.

“Let me state that the character-building activities are necessary components of the
Comprehensive Values Education curriculum where students are given actual opportunities
to practice, experience, test, and deepen whatever is taught and caught in the other aspects of
learning,” he said.

(Villanueva’s bill isn’t the only one currently pending in Congress that tackles the issue of
deteriorating values education and GMRC among Filipinos. Like for instance: At the House
of Representatives, Batangas 5th District Rep. Marvey Mariño has filed House Bill (HB) No.
4681, also known as the compulsory Teaching of Ethics Act.)
GMRC for Adults

Posted by Manila Standard on June 4, 2019—some Lawmakers have proposed that

Good Manners and Right Conduct be reinstated in the K to 12 program. When K to 12 was
introduced seven years ago, GMRC was removed and integrated instead in other subject
curriculum.

1-Ang Educkasyong Party-list Rep. Salvador Belaro feels it high time to remind the
youth about core values. A similar bill was filed by Senator JV Ejercito Estrada.

There is no quarrel that the children need to be taught the basics of human decency,
especially at a time when so many communication channels vie for their attention. These
distractions compete with the lessons preached or lived by their parents, teachers, and the
immediate community.

The belief is that children need to be oriented, re-oriented, to fundamental ways of

behaving toward others and in the context of the larger society. These values, once ingrained
in children at a young age, would stay with them and guide them as they progress in their
lives.

Parents and teachers without needing to be told no doubt do all they can to prepare
their children for life outside the home and school. These places are conservatories where
elders are able to watch the words and actions of children, and correct them when they cross
the line.

There are some who say that GMRC training should start even before children learn
to read and write—and we agree, if such training can be sustained well into adulthood. We
wonder, though, if there is such a thing as GMRC adults who are now in charge of their own
homes and organizations, who earn their own keeps, and who recognize no higher authority.

We believe that when young people get out of school, they carry with them only
idealism and good intentions. They do not necessarily go out into the world planning to be
loudmouthed, arrogant, entitled, bigoted, or unfair to their fellowmen. They do not declare
that they want to be plunderers or liars or killers when asked about their ambition.

It is when they are exposed to the realities—and the perks—of privilege that they
usually forget the things taught to them as children, no matter how well-meaning and
assiduous their parents and teachers are.

They allow these entitlements to addle their judgment and they become heady-eight
the notion that they can do no wrong, and that they are above any norms.

Unfortunately, there is no grading system that can evaluate this, and no corrective
measures can apply except the eventual consequences of their folly.
CHED: Re-implementation of Subject on Proper Conduct

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) battled for the revival of the subject
on Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) in the basic education sector following the
violent actions by students protesting against the planned tuition increase.

Describing as, “unfortunate” the behavior of the young. Although we are a

democracy, there are still laws to be followed. Maybe there should be much more responsible
behavior here,” said Angeles.

Angeles lamented that the violent protest action by students and youth group held at
the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP), University of the Philippines, Diliman
and even in the CHED head office in Diliman Quezon City resulted to damage to properties
worth millions of pesos. He said damage to properties in CHED office was placed close to
more than P500,000.

The CHED chairman expressed belief it’s about time that GMRC should be revived
or re-implemented and be taught as a separate subject in the elementary level.

He noted that the revision of basic education curriculum in the primary even during
the 1990’s led to junking of GMRC, a core subject in elementary education, and was merely
reintegrated to Edukasyong Panlipunan at Pantahanan subject.

“The intention to protest is good but their violent action only resulted to damage to
properties,” Angeles said, stressing that the students should observed proper conduct and not
resort to violence.

He also disclosed that he intends to set a meeting with newly designated Education
Secretry Mona Valisno for the revival and re-implementation of the GMRC subject in the
basic education curriculum. (March 30, 2010 AH/Sunnex)

House Bill Seeks To Revive Good Manners And Right Conduct (GMRC) as a Separate
Subject in the Basic Education Curriculum

According to Mark Anthony Llego of the Teaching and Education, in the old
curriculum of our basic education program, a subject entitled “Good Manners and Right
Conduct” or GMRC, is a part of the regular basic education curriculum. Subsequently, it was
scrapped as a regular subject and integrated in Social Studies and other related subjects.

Revival of GMRC Act of 2017

This bill seeks to revive GMRC and to include it as one of the separate subjects in the
revived K to 12 Program in basic education.
 The necessity for such revival stems from the observation that the youth today has a
surplusage of role models for their behavior owing to the information explosion in this age of
the internet. Modernization in a globalized village almost always results to confusion in the
minds of our youth as the variety of influences make them vulnerable to the pervasive effects
of pop culture, which is not always admirable and worthy of emulation. In fact, there is a
detrimental side of pop culture which challenges (the inculcation of the basic tenets of the
promotion and observance of respect for oneself, others, and our elders, as well as the
teaching of the values of patience, perseverance, industry, honesty and good faith in dealing
with other human beings.

In view of such occurrence, it may be prudent to introduce in the curriculum a “set

menu” of lessons on good manners and right conduct so as to better guide our youth in facing
contemporary society.

Thus, the passage on the bill is very much needed as it is very timely.

HOUSE BILL NO. 6705

AN ACT TO REVIVE GOOD MANNERS AND RIGHT CONDUCT (GMRC) AS A

SEPARATE SUBJECT IN THE BASIC CURRICULUM

Introduced by Representative Salvador B. Belaro, Jr.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress

assembled:

SECTION 1. Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Revival of Good Manners and
Right Conduct Act of 2017.”

SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy – It is the policy of the State to recognize the vital role
of the youth in nation-building and to promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual,
intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism,
and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.

SECTION 3. Inclusion as a Separate Subject in the Curriculum of Basic Education,

Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC). – The Department of Education (DepEd) is
herein tasked to include as a separate subject in the curriculum of the present K to 12
program in basic education Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) which shall inculcate
among our students the basic tenets of the promotion and observance of respect for oneself,
others, and our elders, as well as the teaching of the values of patience, perseverance,
industry, honesty and good faith in dealing with other human beings.

SECTION 4. Funding. – An initial budget of Twenty Million Pesos (P20,000,000.00) is

hereby allocated for this Act. The funds necessary to carry out the provision of this Act
shall be included in the General Appropriation Act (GAA) of the year following its enactment
into law and thereafter.
SECTION 5. Implementing Rules. - The Department of Education (DepEd), is hereby
tasked to jointly formulate the implementing rules and regulations of this Act.

SECTION 6. Separability Clause. – If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the other
provisions not affected shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 7. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees or rules inconsistent with this Act are
hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 8. – This Act shall take effect fefteen (15) days after ythe completion of its
publication in the Official Gazzete or in at least two (2) newspapers of general education

Approved.

HOUSE BILL NO. 6705 HISTORY

FULL TITLE: An Act To Revive Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) as a Separate
Subject in the Basic Education curriculum

PRINCIPAL AUTHOR: BELARO, SALVADOR Jr. B.

DATE FILED: 2017-11-22

SIGNIFICANCE: NATIONAL

CO-AUTHORS (Journal Entries): 1.n Bravo (M.) (0002018-01-30) 2. Sy-Alvarado (000

2017-12-11)

ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE ON RULES: Referral to the Committee on

Basic Education and Culture on 2017-11-28
 CHAPTER I

KNOWING ONESELF

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify self and the importance of self-awareness.

2. Discern and demonstrate ways of understanding the self.
3. Discover and show appreciation of one’s uniqueness.

Guide questions:

1. How do you define “Self?”

2. Do you have the same definitions of self in philosophical and psychological
perspectives?
3. How well do you know yourself?
4. Are you aware of your talents? Skills? Weaknesses or Strengths?

INTRODUCTION

THE IMPORTANCE OF REFLECTION IN EDUCATION

If I touch a hot stove and burn my hand, I immediately learn that touching a hot stove
results in a burned hand. My brain makes the connection almost simultaneously. There’s a
little need for reflection because the “hot stove=burn” connection is one that my mind makes
almost immediately.

Similarly, suppose I’m driving in bad weather and going too fast for the conditions. If
my car spins out and I find myself stuck in a ditch, I’ve learned a lesson about driving in bad
weather. Again, the connection is almost instantaneous. Academic learning however is
seldom that obvious.

Let’s pretend that I am fourth grade student, distracted by everything from cafeteria
food to the playground outside my classroom window. If I fail a math test, am I immediately
able to tell you why? Most kids aren’t self-aware enough or mature enough to tell why they
failed at something (or in some cases, why they got into trouble). The younger the student,
the more difficult it is.

More than likely, since I’m not sure exactly WHY I failed a test, the only connection
in my brain makes is “Math = F”. Since most kids really do want to be successful, students
also equate “F = Failure” and “Failure = Bad”. They don’t understand that failure is a part of
learning process, largely because we as teachers don’t allow students to re-do work and learn
from mistakes. As a result, they come to hate the subject or the teacher, never really knowing
why other than “I suck in Math.”

This is precisely why reflection is so important. Although it it a cumbersome and

time-consuming practice to teach to kids, without reflection it is almost impossible for actual
“learning” to occur. Faced with increasing demands to “cover” as much material as possible
to prepare for state tests, teachers often forego teaching students to reflect on their work,
electing to instead “cover” the material. We often accuse kids of having “forgotten” material
they “learned” the year before, but in reality, they never really learned it at all. The teacher
“covered” it perhaps the students memorized it for the short term before being lost forever.
Reflection is a key ingredient to move knowledge from short-term to long-term memory.

Consider John Dewey’s famous quote “We do not learn from experience. We learn
from reflecting on experience.” Reformers like Dewey have been talking about the
importance of reflection in the learning process since the 1930’s for a more contemporary
spin. Consider the work of Dr. Bobb Darnell and his website “AchievementStrategies.org.”
Darnell describes the learning process as “Input-Process-Output-Reflect” and notes that
without reflection, it is very difficult to have genuine learning.

If the goal is not merely coverage but actual learning, then reflection is no longer
optional—it’s an essential piece to transition a classroom from “covering material” to being
“focused on learning.”

After all, if I touch a hot stove and burn my hand, but never make the connection than
the hot stove is what burned my hand, I’m likely to repeat that mistake. This is an absurd
example—of course it’s the stove that burned my hand—but oftentimes in life “What went
wrong?” is a question without an obvious answer. And unfortunately, it’s a question that the
vast majority of our students never think to ask.

And while many colleges talk about the importance of being a “reflective
practitioner” in their teacher training programs, there seems to be little “reflection” taught in
the classroom... probably because teachers are so bad at it themselves.

For some silly reasons it’s not cool, to talk about “reflecting.” It’s difficult for
teachers, who as a result of their position as the “distributor of knowledge” in the mind of
most students and parents, feel obligated to be “right” all the time. This is of course, absurd.
However, because of this need to be right we get very defensive and struggle to admit when
we’re wrong.
 There’s something about the word “reflection” that seems to make teachers
uncomfortable maybe because it’s too touchy, “feely” for some. Regardless, if we’re not
willing to practice it ourselves and model it for our students, how can we ever hope to see
them reflect on their own mistakes?

Reflection is an integral part of the learning process. It allows us to learn more about
ourselves and how we learn, but it also aids us in improving academic skills. Consider sports
teams that watch film of the previous night’s game. They are able to identify mistakes and
correct them at practice. Looking at a failed math test can have the same result if we help
students to notice “Oh! I forget to carry the one every time I borrow!” Then we can look back
on the learning process as well, and help students discern which activities worked well for
them and which ones didn’t.

Teaching students to reflect on their work by noticing and correcting their own
mistakes as well as which activities and behaviors allowed them to be successful is a vital
part of the learning experience that far too many classrooms leave out of the equation. As
teachers, we should model this expectation by reflecting ourselves and involving students in
our own reflections. Only then can we help students understand not to touch a hot stove, as
opposed to simply making them afraid of all stoves forever.

LESSON 1. The Self from Various Perspectives (Review of the Related Literature)

“Instead of asking what you want to be when you grow up, ask what problems you want to
solve”

- Lauren Hurt-Ashwin -

“--- if somebody’s going to be in-charge, it might as well be me”

- Daniel Akst –

One of the things in knowing yourself is being aware of who you are and what you are to
your community. The persistent question, “Who am I” is rooted in the human need to
understand the basis of the experiences of the self. When people are sk to explain their
understanding of the word, the usual answers are: “It’s who I am.” “It’s me, my essence.”
“It’s what makes me unique and different from everyone else.”

For a more meaningful understanding of the “self,” numerous studies have been
conducted and various approaches have been developed from concepts about it. Important
philosophers from ancient to contemporary times sought to describe the essential qualities
that compose a person’s uniqueness. On the other hand, sociology sees the “self” as a product
of social interactions, developed overtime through social activities and experiences.

Anthropology views the “self” as a culturally shaped construct or idea.

Anthropologists assert that it is an autonomous participant in the society as much as it is
submerged in the community. Meanwhile, rather than giving a definition, psychology sees
the “self” as having characteristics or properties that can be used to describe it. Pioneers in
the study pointed out that the “self” is related to its physical and social environment, it is
unique, and it is necessary to its experiences.

Eastern and Western civilizations have always sought to understand the “self.” Their
views, however, stand on different perspectives. British philosopher Alan Watts (known for
his interpretations of the Eastern Philosophy and m Mythology) talked about great “myths” of
the Self. However, it should be noted that the term “myth” here is not used to describe a false
story, rather it is used as a means to interpret a reality.

According to Watts, the pervading myth in the West is that “the world is an artifact.”
This means there is a clear distinction between the creator and the creation. This perspective
indicates that the Western interpretation of the “self” possesses an internal distinction from its
external environment that even though the “self” functions in the world, the “self” is still its
own.

In the East however, the myth is that “the world is a drama and all things are actors
with specific parts to play.” There is no distinction between the creator and the creation as all
that exist is immersed in one and the same existence. This perspective suggests that the “self”
in Eastern traditions is seen through the eyes of the community, rather than detached, single
entity. However, Watts further clarified that his statements on the two great myths of the
“self” is only a description of what is “like” in that civilization, and not a definition of what it
“is.”

Different Perspectives in the Explanation of the Self

Learning the various fundamental concept of the “self” is significant because these ideas
lay the foundation that will foster in you, the learner, a deep reflection and insight into the
continuous pursuit of self-discovery.

A. PHILOSOPHY – the term as originally used by the Greeks meant “the pursuit of
knowledge for its own sake.

One aspect that makes us humans different from all other creatures on earth is our
capacity to build on knowledge. We learn, we apply it in our lives, and we use acquired ideas
to create. How did ancient thinkers view a human being?

Philosophical musing has produced some of the most important original ideas over the
centuries, their contributions to all areas of learning are inestimable. Some views may be
more popular, others a bit unknown, but humanity’s development is founded on the views of
our ancient thinkers.

PHILOSOPHERS:

1. Socrates – (“I Know That I Don’t Know”), a Greek philosopher, known for his
method of inquiry in testing an idea, called the Socratic Method. He believed that
philosophy had a very important role to play in the lives of the people. One of his
most-quoted phrases is, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” According to
him, self-knowledge or the examination of one’s life, as well as the question about
how one ought to live one’s life, are very important concerns because only by
knowing yourself can you hope to improve your life. (Rappe, 1995). Socrates
believed that you as a person should consciously contemplate, turn your gaze
inward, and analyze the true nature and values that are guiding your life. He added
self-knowledge would open your eyes to your true nature; which contrary to pop
culture, is not about what you own, how many “Likes” you get in your social
media posts, or how successfully you are in your career. In fact, your real self is
not even your body. According to Socrates, the state of your inner being
(soul/self) determines the quality of your life. Socrates believed that the goal of
life is to be happy. According to him, the virtuous man is a happy man, and the
virtue alone is the one and only supreme good that will secure his happiness.
Virtue is defined as moral excellence, and an individual is considered virtuous if
his character is made up of the moral qualities that are accepted as virtues:
courage, temperance, prudence, and justice (The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, 2017). According to Socrates, even death is trivial matter for the truly
virtuous because he has realized that the most important thing in life is the state of
his soul and the acts taken from taking care of the soul through self-knowledge.

2. Plato – (“Balance Between Mind and Body”) (“Good actions give strength to
ourselves and inspire good action in others”), he was the student of Socrates and is
perhaps the single most important influence of the Western concept of “Self.”
According to him, the “soul” is indeed the most divine aspect of the human-being.
However, his concept of the divine is not a spiritual being but rather one that has
an intellectual connotation. The self/soul/mind according to him is the aspect of
human beings by which the FORMS (ideas) are known. The three parts of the soul
according to him are: 1) the appetitive (sensual); the element that enjoys sensual
experiences such as food and drink, 2) the rational (reasoning); the element that
forbids the person to enjoy the sensual experiences; through the use of reason. 3)
the spirited (feeling); the element that is inclined toward reason but understands
the demands of passion; the part that loves honor and victory.

3. St. Augustine – (“All Knowledge Leads to God”) one of the most significant
Christian thinkers, also called St. Augustine of Hippo. He was deeply influenced
 by Plato’s ideas and adopted Plato’s view of the “Self” as an immaterial (but
rational) soul, giving the Theory of Forms as a Christian perspective. He believed
that the human being was both a soul and body, and the body possessed senses,
such as imagination, memory, reason, and mind through which the soul
experienced the world with its aspects as follows: 1) it is able to be aware of itself,
2) it recognizes itself as a holistic one, 3) it is aware of its unity.

4. Rene Descartes – (“Cogito ergo sum” translated as “I think, Therefore I Am”),

his famous line and considered the father of the modern Western philosophy. His
claims about the “self” are: 1) it is constant; not prone to change; not affected by
time, 2) only the immaterial soul remains the same through time; 3) the immaterial
soul is the source of our identity. He describes the “self” as a thinking thing.

5. John Locke – (“Tabula Rasa”) “Human mind at birth is a tabula rasa, which
means that all knowledge is derived from experience.” If Descartes described the
“self” as a thinking thing, Locke expanded this definition of “self” to include the
memories of that thinking thing. He believed that the “self” is identified with
consciousness, that the person existing now is the same person yesterday for a
person’s memories provide a continuity of experience that allows him to identify
himself as the person overtime.

6. David Hume – (“All Knowledge is Derived from Human Senses”) He was a

fierce opponent of Descartes’ Rationalism, the theory that reason, rather than
experience, is the foundation of all knowledge. Hume was identified with the
Bundle Theory wherein he described the “self” or person (assumed to be the
“mind”) as a bundle or a collection of different perceptions that are moving in a
very fast and successive manner; therefore, it is in “perpetual reflux.” Hume
compared the “self” to a nation; whereby a nation retains its “being a nation” not
by some single core identity but by being composed of different, constantly
changing elements, such as people, system, culture, and beliefs. Hume’s “self” is
passive observer similar to watching one’s life pass before the eyes like a play or
on a screen; whereby the total annihilation of the “self” comes at death.

7. Immanuel Kant – (“Reason is the final authority of morality. Morality is

achieved only when there is absence of war because of the result of
enlightenment.”) He is a central figure in modern philosophy. Kant’s view of the
“self” is transcendental, which means the “self” is related to a spiritual or
nonphysical realm. For him, the self is not in the body. The self is outside the
body and its qualities are rooted to the “self.” Kant points is that there are two
components of the “self”: 1) Inner self – by which you are aware of the alterations
in your own state, 2) Outer self – that includes your senses and the physical world.

8. Sigmund Freud – (“Wish Fulfillment is the Road to the Unconscious”) He is one

of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century. His most important
 contribution, particularly in psychology, was Psychoanalysis, a practice devised to
treat those who are mentally ill through dialogue. Freud, however, did not accept
the existence of any single entity that could be put forward as the notion of “self.”
His work in the field of psychoanalysis was groundbreaking because it answered
questions about human psyche in a way that no one else had before him. He
further structured the psyche/mind into three parts: 1) Id. It operates on the
pleasure of principle, 2) Ego. It operates according to the reality principle, 3)
Superego. It incorporates the values and morals of society.

9. Gilbert Ryle – (“I Act, Therefore I Am”) He wrote the Concept of Mind (1949)
where he rejected the notion that mental states are separable from physical states
into which produced a critique on Descartes’ idea that mind is distinct from
the body. Knowledge, memory, imagination, and any other abilities of
dispositions do not reside “within” the mind as if the mind were a space in which
these could be stored or located. If Ryle believed that the concept of a distinct
“self” is not real, where do we get our sense of self? Ryle asserted that it is from
our behaviors and actions. For example, you think of yourself as a kind person
because of your acts of kindness. In Ryle’s view, your actions define your own
concept of “self” (who you are)

10. Paul Churchland – (“The Physical Brain and Not the Imaginary mind gives us
our sense of self”) He is known for his studies in neuro-philosophy and the
philosophy of mind His philosophy stands on a materialistic view or the belief that
nothing but matter exists. Specifically, Churchland’s idea is called Eliminative
Materialism or the claim that the people’s commo-sense understanding of the
mind (or folk psychology) is false, and that certain classes of mental states which
most people believe in do not exist. (Churchland, 1989, Baker, 1995) He asserted
the sense of “self” originated from the brain itself, and that this “self” is a product
of electrochemical signals produced by the brain.

11. Maurice Merleau-Ponty – (“Physical body is an important part of the self”) His
idea of “self” is an embodied subjectivity. He asserted that the human beings are
embodied subjectivities, and that the understanding of the “self” should begin
from his fundamental fact. He added that the body is not a mere “house” where
the mind resides. Rather it is through the lived experience of the body that you
perceive; are informed; and interact with the world. (Varela, Thompson, & Rosch,
2017). According to him, the body acts what the mind perceives as a unified one.
REFLECTION ACTIVITY

1. Construct your own Philosophy in Life. Write it on one-page paper and we will
discuss next meeting.