Immaculada Concepcion College

Of Soldier’s Hills Caloocan City, Inc.

Soldier’s Hills III Subd. Brgy. 180, Tala, North Caloocan City

Name: Aquino, Charles Ashley G. Strand and Section: HUMSS - HERACLITUS

Teacher: Mr. Aries Solomon Period cover: ____________________________
Week # 13

LESSON 11: PANTAYONG PANANAW

I. INTRODUCTION
In this lesson, you will learn about the Pantayong Pananaw. What is Pantayong Pananaw? The Pantayong pananaw (also
called bagong kasaysayan or new history) is currently the most theoretically elaborate articulation of an indigenized social science
perspective that offers a viable alternative to positivist social science.

II. LESSON OBJECTIVES

At the end of this lesson, you are expected to:
a. describe Pantayong pananaw;
b. construct an essay about pantayong pananaw; and
c. recognize the importance of Pantayong pananaw.

III. PRE- ASSESSMENT

Directions: Solve the following word equations. Write your answers on the space provided before the number.

HISTORY 1. HIM – M + STORY=

MODERN 2. MODEL – L + RN=
NORMS 3. NONE – NE + RMS=
CONTRACT 4. CONTRAST – ST + CT
CULTURAL 5. CULTURE-E+AL=

IV. LESSON CONTENT

A series of monographs published in the 1990s by Zeus A. Salazar (1997; 1998; 1999), within the framework of Pantayong Pananaw,
deliver strikingly original perspectives on writing the history of Philippine political discourse. But this initially very promising body of
work which focuses on the cultural specificity of Philippine political concepts has unnecessarily been hampered by certain fixed and
inflexible assumptions which, despite its undoubtedly positive contributions, could negatively influence further researches in this
important area. The problems in the current approach may be exemplified by reference to his analysis of two important political
concepts found in Tagalog or Filipino, himagsikan and rebolusyon. (It also applies to his distinction between katwiran and “reason,”
among others.)

PANTAYONG PANANAW

The Pantayong Pananaw (also called “Bagong Kasaysayan”, or new history) is currently the most theoretically elaborate articulation
of an indigenized social science perspective that offers a viable alternative to (western) positivist social science. The Pantayong
Pananaw is the brainchild of Prof. Zeus Salazar, a historian who spent most of his teaching career at the department of history at the
University of the Philippines-Diliman; in the course of his advocacy, Salazar was able to gather a number of historians who shared his
call for a more culturally-sensitive historiography in the teaching of Philippine history. At present, the Pantayong Pananaw has
become an established perspective in Philippine historiography and has spread outside the university’s own department of history.

In broad strokes, Pantayong Pananaw’s approach begins with the need to sustain a talastasang bayan (national discourse) by
distinguishing among different historiographies and how they relate to the formation of national/cultural identity. The Pantayong
Pananaw, seeks to create a ‘closed circuit of interaction’ (Mendoza 2007) between academic discourse (especially history) and
kaalamang katutubo (indigenous knowledge). In this regard, language plays a central role; hence, historians identified with Pantayong
 Immaculada Concepcion College
Of Soldier’s Hills Caloocan City, Inc.
Soldier’s Hills III Subd. Brgy. 180, Tala, North Caloocan City
Pananaw speak and write in Philippine languages so that the talastasan (discourse) is always oriented toward local cultures and not to
‘outsiders’ and their interests.

Ramon Guillermo organizes his critical appraisal of the Pantayong Pananaw into two chapters:

In the first chapter, titled pook (location/place), he recognizes the importance of Salazar’s ideas in challenging positivist
historiography that, in the end, privileges the imperialistic dominance of western discourse. Nevertheless, he proceeds to pinpoint
specific weaknesses in Salazar’s arguments, in particular regarding the exclusive use of Philippine languages in discourse and the
process of forming a Pambansang Kalinangan (National Culture). Regarding the use of language, Guillermo criticizes Salazar’s
uncompromising rejection of concepts that do not originate from Philippine languages as automatically ‘western’ or ‘foreign’. A
classic example is the Tagalog word “himagsikan”, which is akin to the western concept of revolución (revolution): Salazar
distinguishes himagsikan and revolución, and he refuses to accept revolución as a meaningful category in the Philippine context,
notwithstanding the fact that it was already translated into Philippine languages and already used extensively in everyday discourse.
The point is that such a closed attitude toward concepts originating outside the local culture preempts the possibility of appropriating
these concepts within local discourse. Moreover, Guillermo notes that the exclusive use of local languages does not itself address the
issue of specialized and everyday discourses that also create hierarchical relationships within the users of that language.

In the second part, titled paninindigan (principled commitment), Guillermo outlines the development of indigenized marxist/socialist
thought in the Philippines. Starting with a closer look at the political thought of Emilio Jacinto of the Katipunan (the revolutionary
organization that spearheaded the 1896 revolution against Spain), Guillermo unpacks local notions of class-based exploitation and
emerging class consciousness among the peasant class. After the 1896 revolution, a generation of writers continued the propagation of
socialist discourse by tackling various social ills plaguing Philippine society, particularly the continued exploitation of the working
class. Their writings, however, still alluded to the possibility of a ‘change of heart’ on the part of landowners.

Guillermo’s book, in summary, contains a straightforward critique of Pantayong Pananaw as articulated by its most prominent
spokesperson. His familiarity not only with the entire corpus of Salazar’s scholarly work, but also with other thinkers identified with
Pantayong Pananaw and its critics, enables him to provide a comprehensive synthesis of this emerging intellectual perspective. This
book stands as the author’s most nuanced treatment of Pantayong Pananaw, which was also the subject of a number of his earlier
scholarly writings (e.g. Guillermo 2003).

V. PRACTICE

Using the graphic organizer below, how would describe Zeus A. Salazar?

Historian
Dedicated &
Committed
Intellectual
on his works

Zeus A. Salazar

Professor at
Influential
UP
 Immaculada Concepcion College
Of Soldier’s Hills Caloocan City, Inc.
Soldier’s Hills III Subd. Brgy. 180, Tala, North Caloocan City

VI. ENRICHMENT
What is the significance of Pantayong Pananaw in Social Science?

Pantayong Pananaw is important to Social Science because it includes the use of our national language as the
primary means of communicating with our fellow Filipino people. It also emphasizes the importance of our own
language than other foreign languages through this Pantayong Pananaw we should know that we have to use our
own language to communicate and to be understood by our countrymen and it also symbolizes unity. In this concept
we have to learn that we must patronize our own language and not be influenced by Western Culture since language
stands for the identity of a country, also the importance of Pantayong Pananaw is that it will teach us the origin of a
word and its meaning so Pantayong Pananaw has a great impact in Social Science especially on national discourse.
Lastly, for me the Pantayong Pananaw is important in our history since some of foreign historians wrote about
Philippines are not for Filipino people instead it is for them to emphasize their influence on our country so we should
support Filipino Historians than foreign historians who just want to manipulate Filipinos.

VII. EVALUATION
Directions: Write a reflection paper about Pantayong Pananaw. Use separate sheet of paper for your work. You will be graded
according to these following criteria.

Traits Weight Above average Average (4 points) Fair (3 points) Needs Improvement Score
(5 points) (2 point)
Focus & Details 1 There is one clear, There is one clear, There is one topic. The topic and main
well focused topic. well focused topic. Main ideas are ideas are not clear.
Main ideas are clear Main ideas are clear somewhat clear.
and are well but are not well
supported by supported by
detailed and detailed information.
accurate
information.
Organization 1 The introduction is The introduction The introduction There is no clear
inviting, states the states the main topic states the main topic. introduction,
main topic, and and provides an A conclusion is structure, or
provides an overview of the included. conclusion.
overview of the paper. A conclusion
paper. Information is included.
 Immaculada Concepcion College
Of Soldier’s Hills Caloocan City, Inc.
Soldier’s Hills III Subd. Brgy. 180, Tala, North Caloocan City
is relevant and
presented in a
logical order. The
conclusion is strong
Voice 1 The author’s The author’s purpose The author’s purpose The author’s purpose
purpose of writing of writing is of writing is of writing is unclear.
is very clear, and somewhat clear, and somewhat clear, and
there is strong there is some there is evidence of
evidence of evidence of attention attention to audience.
attention to to audience. The The author’s
audience. The author’s knowledge knowledge and/or
author’s extensive and/or experience experience with the
knowledge and/or with the topic is/are topic is/are limited.
experience with the evident
topic is/are evident.
Word Choice 1 The author uses The author uses The author uses The writer uses a
vivid words and vivid words and words that limited vocabulary.
phrases. The choice phrases. The choice communicate Jargon or clichés may
and placement of and placement of clearly, but the be present and detract
words seems words is inaccurate writing lacks variety. from the meaning.
accurate, natural, at times and/or
and not forced. seems overdone.
Sentence 1 All sentences are Most sentences are Most sentences are Sentences sound
Structure, well constructed well constructed and well constructed, but awkward, are
Grammar, and have varied have varied structure they have a similar distractingly
Mechanics, structure and length. and length. The structure and/or repetitive, or are
& Spelling The author makes author makes a few length. The author difficult to
no errors in errors in grammar, makes several errors understand. The
grammar, mechanics, and/or in grammar, author makes
mechanics, and/or spelling, but they do mechanics, and/or numerous errors in
spelling. not interfere with spelling that interfere grammar, mechanics,
understanding. with understanding. and/or spelling that
interfere with
understanding.
Total 5

References:

Guillermo, Ramon G. (2003). Exposition, Critique, and New Directions for Pantayong Pananaw. Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia 3:
March.

Mendoza, S. Lily L. (2007). Theoretical Advances in the Discourse of Indigenization. In Atoy Navarro & Flordeliza Lagbao-Bolante
(eds.). Mga Babasahin sa Agham Panlipunang Pilipino
 Immaculada Concepcion College
Of Soldier’s Hills Caloocan City, Inc.
Soldier’s Hills III Subd. Brgy. 180, Tala, North Caloocan City

On this lesson I learned how Pantayong Pananaw affects the Social Science and the one who created it was a Filipino
historian namely Zeus Salazar who is once a professor at University of the Philippines (Diliman)in department of history.

Pantayong Pananaw taught us to patronize our own language and to use it rather than using Western Culture since language is
one of the identities of a country so we must give importance to it, also I learned on this topic the difference of foreign historians and
Filipino historians we must be aware on reading facts and information in our history because some of foreign historians wrote articles
about Philippine History and they just emphasized their own culture that influenced our country and not the Filipino culture. Then, the
impact of this on our everyday discourse is important because language is the primary topic in this concept, since we use our language
to communicate therefore we need to understand the origin and the meaning of the words that we are using in our daily
communication.

We must support Pantayong Pananaw because we need to preserve our own language and we need to be aware on the
informations and facts about Philippine History so we will not be misled on studying our own history. We must be grateful on our
Filipino historians who just want to share the truth about Philippine History.