Emerita Quito’s paradigmatic contribution on Filipino philosophy is mainly the analysis on the

state of itself. It includes the analysis of our local philosophy’s historical progression starting from its
indigenous roots, its state during colonization and world wars, up until to the contemporary time.

In this published research, The State of Philosophy in the Philippines Quito started to address the
state of our philosophy by giving historical backgrounds on indigenous philosophy and how colonization
dominates our own Filipino thought. She stated that the term philosophy in the Philosophy must be
discussed on two different levels; the academic, and the popular or grassroots level. (Quito, 1983 p. 9)
On the academic level, philosophy is a concern of the universities, as most of it came from and
influences by the Religion from Spaniards, thus having the academies focus in Thomistic Philosophy or
any other trend. On the other hand, far from the influences of our colonizers, the indigenous Filipinos
had their own perspective and understanding of life. It constitutes a body of sayings, way of living,
traditions, and conduct of life – this is the Indigenous philosophy from the grassroots level. Quito then
further elaborated on this in Asian context as she gave examples such as the famous sayings, Bahala na,
Gulong ng Palad, pakikisama, bayanihan, utang na loob, and the indigent’s Supreme Being called,
Bathala. This is for us to recognize that this kind of understanding of life are not just simply famous
sayings that are passed through generations. These are our own way of Filipino living – our indigenous
philosophy.

In this resarch, Quito further provide a historical background of Philosophy as a discipline, by

including the curriculum and its development throughout the years and the universities and institutions
offering it. She also addressed the problem with the decreasing prioritization of Philosophy as a
discipline due to shift and reformations on the curriculum, post-war effects, and how historical events
such as the Martial Law filters some of the philosophical thought which affected the growth of the
discipline. Quito also addressed the discipline and how it is taught citing the problems with the
treatment of professors in our country, and how unbalance their wages with the units and workloads
they are having. It also includes the insufficient funding for further researches and development on
curriculum, lack of working knowledge of foreign language, and motivation (Quito, 1983, p. 49). This is a
vital analysis with how the Philosophy as a discipline is given less priority as year’s progress. This results
to the lack of cultivation of Philosophy from academic and its community context such as the lack of
opportunities, international networks, and the stagnated progress of researches, including on the
Filipino Philosophy itself.

Quito’s nationalism was her primary motivation on the analysis of the state of Filipino
Philosophy. It was also reflected on some of her works stated which includes, Ang Pilosopiya sa Diwang
Pilipino 1972, and Ang kasaysayan ng Pilosophiya 1974. This made her as the first Filipino to have
published works of Philosophy in the Filipino language. (Quito, 1983, p. 41) She also wrote on the
Filipino Experience in Chapter III of a monograph entitled Lectures on Comparative Philosophy and
recently came out on a Professional Chair lecture entitled Structuralism and the Filipino Volkgeist.

Quito later provide suggestions and recommendations for the future of Philosophy. Quito
emphasizes on the obstacle of language on the cultivation of our philosophy. For her, it is important to
contextualize philosophy in our local and indigenous language. Until the Filipino recover the native
tongue, it will not develop an indigenous philosophy, for the soul of the people is better expressed in a
native language. (Quito, 1983, p. 55) She also suggested that our professors need exposure on other
philosophical trend to start a Hegelian dialectics which result on a richer understanding of concepts
(Quitom 1983, p. 57). Then later proceeds to address the funding of philosophy to prevent it stagnation.
She highlighted the relationship of the community with international funding agencies to support the
philosophical researches. (Quito, 1983, p. 58) This would later transcend the indigenous Filipino thought
from the grass root to academic level.