Even if it is difficult, it is wise to recontextualize what I consume, especially if these are prescriptive, to my unique point of view (i.e., as a Filipino, PWD, etc.).

However, there are topics that are universal that this recontextualization does not matter, and these topics and questions are what I am most interested in. Big mistakes could happen if we let recontextualization, especially when done so to advance struggles for power, to affect our search for objective truth.

For example, the colonial-decolonial discourse lies only on the level of culture and power. These conversations are less fundamental than, say the question about “what exists”. If I am going to use cultural discourse to answer this question, I would arrive in a conclusion like this:

“In the Philippines, precolonial indigenous peoples believe in anitos or gods. I am a Filipino. Therefore I need to agree with this precolonial worldview and reject the scientific worldview.”

This argumentation is obviously flawed, but we could easily fall into it if we are include our struggle for power in the discussion. Is it justifiable that I should be skeptical to everything Western just because I am an Easterner?

In our search for objective, fundamental truth, we should never include a discourse about culture and power.

We are human beings before we are of a certain nationality.

To do

• This note is still very raw. Lots of the claims here needs refinement.
• Connect this with your quest for authenticity (see my search for my authentic writing voice is an extension of my pursuit for freedom)

References

Mabaquiao, N. (2011). Isang Paglilinaw sa Kahulugan at Kairalan ng Pilosopiyang Filipino = A Clarification in the Existence and Meaning of Filipino Philosophy. Malay, 23(2), 39–56.