1

ANGELA’S PART
Development of Sociology in the Philippines

Sociology was introduced in the Philippines during the latter part

of the Spanish regime. Fr. Valentin Marin introduced a course on
criminology at the University of Santo Tomas, using a social
philosophical approach.

When Americans took over the reign of the government from the
Spanish colonizers, they fused anthropology and sociology using
western models to guide the colonial administrators and settlers.
This is attributed to two significant conditions: the persistence of
traditionalism and the lack of a strong belief that science can be
a strong force in studying and rendering social realities (Abad
and Eviota 1982:131132).

The first stage was characterized by the inclusion of sociology in college

and university courses and the teaching of social philosophy.
This approach was used until the 1950s when sociology was
taught from the normative point of ‘what ought to be,’ with the
little emphasis on the scientific nature of sociology. This was
followed by similar courses under the initiative of American
educators A.W. Salt and Murray Bartlett at the University of the
Philippines in Manila and Clyde Heflin at Silliman University in
Dumaguete. Filipino social scientists Conrado Benitez and Luis
Rivera also taught sociology courses, using materials that were
western in orientation.

The view of sociology as a problem oriented discipline was

introduced by Serafin N. Macaraig, the first Filipino to acquire a
doctorate degree in sociology and to write a sociology textbook,
An Introduction to Sociology, in 1938. He attempted to introduce
the scientific view but with little success. Although sociology was
taught in colleges and universities outside Manila, the course’s
contents and teacher’s orientation were substandard in terms of
sociological theory and method (Abad and Eviota 1982:132).
Sociology made very little dent on the academic communities.
Some social research studies were made by western social
 2

scientists on Philippine ethnic groups, when sociology and

anthropology were merged into a department headed by H. Otley
Beyer. Although sociology gained more academic recognition in
the 1940s, very little systematic social research was conducted
in the field.

In the 1950s, a scientific orientation started to seep slowly into

sociology with the increased number of educational exchange
program grantees, the establishment of social science research
centers and councils, the growing frequency of conferences, and
the publication of professional journals. A number of Filipinos
enjoyed foreign scholarships in the United States, with a number
of them training at the University of Chicago and Cornell
University. The returning scholars ushered into the country a
number of theoretical perspectives, like the functional theory of
Durkheim, Parsons, and Lundberg, the neopositivism of George
Lundberg, the social psychological theories of Cooley and Mead,
and Weber’s value free sociology. There was also an impetus to
social research.

Public and private agencies became increasingly aware of the

significance of social facts in the decision-making process. Data
collected by pioneer Filipino sociologist Benicio Catapusan on
rural Philippines for the government became benchmark of the
distribution of economic aid to the different regions. In 1952,
Filipino educators and visiting professor from the University of
the Philippines, Ateneo de Manila University, and Silliman
University organized the Philippines Sociological Society (PSS).
The objective of the organization was to increase knowledge
about social behaviour, to gather data about social problems, to
train social science teachers and researchers, and to develop
cooperation between Philippine social scientists and those from
other countries. Dr. Chester Hunt, a visiting professor from the
US, played an important role in organizing the PSS. The society
soon published its quarterly journal, the Philippines Sociological
Review. Although membership in the PSS has not grown
considerably through the years, it has organized meetings,
conferences, conventions, seminars, and roving lectures yearly.
 3

These activities focus on empirical research on vital issues and

current sociological development within the Philippine setting.

In 1957, the Community Development Research council (CDRC)

was created to conduct or support social science researches.
Among the several sociologists who availed of its research grant
was Mary Hollnsteiner whose work, The Dynamics of Power in a
Philippine
Municipality, became a benchmark for studies on value and power structure.
Other research grantees were Prospero Covar, Agaton Pal, Fr. Francis
Madigan, S.J., and Felicidad Cordero.

In 1960, the Institution of Philippine Culture (IPC) was founded

at the Ateneo de Manila University by Fr. Frank Lynch, S.J. who
was its moving spirit. IPC spearheaded researches on economic
development, modernization, and problems of education with the
aim of understanding the Filipino way of life using the
interdisciplinary approach. The researches were printed as IPC
papers.

In 1968, The Philippine Social Science Council (PSSC) was

formed to improve the quality and relevance of social sciences.
Hence the different social sciences, through their respective
organizations, set as their goal the improvement of their
performance through communication and collaboration (PSSC
Social Information, May1973:3). PSS represents sociology in the
Council.

The PSSC Research Committee also drafted a set of guidelines

regarding the rights and responsibilities of social scientists in the
“New Society” (the term used by President F. Marcos when he
declared
Martial Law). It stated that Filipino social scientists had made
significant contributions to society and urged them to continue
their tasks under the new social order.

The PSSC has awarded research grants, subsidized researches

and publications, ran research training programs for both basic
 4

and advanced level trainees, and conducted seminars,

conferences, and conventions for the various social sciences. It
has put up research networks in various parts of the country.
Regional research consortia setups are the Visayas Research
Consortium (VRC), with its center at the University of San Carlos,
Iloilo; the Eastern Mindanao Research Center (EMARC), with its
center at Ateneo de Davao University; the Bicol Research
Center; and one center in Cagayan Region.

The scope of Philippines sociology expanded with the increasing

industrialization, urbanization, and modernization and their
corresponding social problems. Researches, therefore, focused
on rural and urban communities, poverty, agrarian reform, and
population. The resulting studies were essential aids to leaders
and decisionmakers who needed scientific knowledge as basis
for policy-making and program implementation.

At present, the importance of sociology in Philippine society

cannot be denied. Gelia T. Castillo, a rural sociologist, says that
“sociology’s greatest challenge lies in the creative translation of
practical problems into researchable ones which will yield
answers or solutions to practical questions which have been
asked by developers” (Castillo 1974:4)

The first school to offer major in sociology was the U.P., while
the first school to offer Ph.D. program in sociology program was
Xavier University in 1972, followed by the U.P. A number of
schools offer sociology as major in the undergraduate level,
while most colleges and universities offer basic courses in
sociology.

END OF ANGELA’S PART

START OF KUYA MIGUEL’S PART

Since the 1960s, empirical researches have been undertaken by

the sociologists from different colleges and universities
throughout the country. De La Salle University established a
 5

social science research center. Incentives for research came

from the Rockefeller and the Ford Foundations, National
Economic Council, U.S Agency for International Development,
and UNESCO. Grants from Europe, Canada, and Japan also
poured in. Some sociologists have left the academe to test their
models in the field. (Bulatao 1979:90).
One trend evident in the social science is the indigenization of
concepts, methods, and theories. Attempts to re-examine the
use of western concepts and models have been made as early
as the 1960s. Gloria D. Feliciano, former chairperson of the U.P.
Department of Mass Communication (1965), pointed out the
need to develop methods and techniques suited to the local
conditions. Efforts in indigenization process are most evident in
the local graduate training program. The appropriateness of
western-derived methods and theories continues to be a topic of
contention.

In the 1970s and 1980s, some social scientists started to

question and challenge the ideological assumptions of earlier
researches. This was influenced by Marxist ideas which
diminished the functionalist and positivist paradigms in
sociology. Sociologists as well as political scientists researched
on the organization and impact of transnational corporations, the
operation of joint venture companies, and the political economy
of agriculture (Bautista 1998;68-69).

Randolf David (1980), a prominent Filipino sociologists,

succinctly depicts in his paper Philippine Underdevelopment and
Dependency Theory (Philippine Sociological Review 28 (1-4):
(81-87), the social realities that Filipino sociologists grapple with.
In the Philippines, as perhaps in the rest of third World countries,
he says we can see the growing unstoppable domination of the
national economy by transnational corporations, the impossibility
of repaying national indebtedness, the increasing pauperism of
the rural masses, the total degradation of the marginalized urban
workers, the intensification of political coercion as the economy
increasingly fails to provide for the needs of poor majority, the
intensifying participation of the military in national life, and more
 6

aggressive intervention by the United States and Japan in

national affairs result of the greater need to secure and protect
their investments from possible expropriation under another
regime. He urged the utilization of university time to deepen
understanding of how Philippine society works and articulating
this critical knowledge in every conceivable forum. The First
Social Congress was held on November 17-19, 1983 with the
theme, ‘towards Excellence in the Social Sciences in the
Philippines.’ This was important event for the social sciences,
including sociologists. Subsequent social science congresses
have been held to assess the role of the social sciences in the
life of the country.

Another issue raised by social scientists is how to close the gap

between the research they produce and utilization of these by
policy makers and program managers. In her analysis, Cynthia
Bautista (1989) bewails the under-utilization, if not the non-
utilization, of social science research, which she attributes to the
poor linkage between the research and the people at the
grassroots, popular organizations, and government agencies.
Another reason is the academic framework. Linking people and
real problems entails expense. Bautista (1989) says:

“It forces social scientists who are used to the safe haven
of the university, to wrestle with issues of objectivity and
commitment. The moral dilemma of value-free social
science partly explains why social scientists stick to the
usual theories and methods, even at the price of being
irrelevant.”

Furthermore, the symbolic interactionism and phenomenological

ideas also became popular and eroded the prevailing framework
(Bautista 1998:70). There were shifts in the methodological
frameworks of the positivist position which advocated rigid
observation, a theoretical framework, and objectivity, and that of
the interpretative explanatory phenomenological,
anthropological, position, and the Marxist position. Methods of
participatory research were developed; these aimed to raise
 7

people’s consciousness and organize some kind of social action

to solve their problems. The University of the Philippines Center
for Women Studies, with Dr. Sylvia Guerrero as Director, took
the lead in producing and field-testing manuals, sourcebook, and
multimedia packages to meet the needs of policy makers,
planners, researchers and other practitioners and professionals
on health, population, and gender (Guerrero 1999:1). According
to Guerrero (1999), the 1990s saw the increasing convergence
of social science theories and methodologies, and the
collaboration of various sectors – academe, government, NGOs,
people organizations, and women’s group.

The social science organizations belonging to the PSSC continued its

thrust in social transformation. In line with this, the Philippine Sociology
Society organized a convention in 1991 with ‘Sociology of
Development’ as its theme. Fr. Renato A. Ocampo, S.J., PSS
president reiterated “the role of sociologists as developing its
research capabilities at the service of information, effective
delivery systems, and monitoring and evaluation of private and
government agencies.” In this same convention, Dr. Ledevina V.
Cariño, two-term PSS president, called on sociologists to
formulate an indigenous Filipino theory in specific issue areas
and the integration of specific areas, e.g., literature, fieldwork,
etc., as suggested by Dr. Sylvia Guerrero. Filipino sociologists
are optimistic that the indigenization and the formulation of a
Filipino sociological theory will be accomplished soon.

END OF KUYA MIGUEL’S PART

START OF KUYA PATRICK’S PART

The Question of a Value-Free Sociology

A critical issue that has long confronted sociologists is the question of a

value-free sociology. The basic question pertains to the main role of
sociologists in society. Should sociologists stick to the goals of their science
or should they actively get involved in social reform? The issue of value-free
sociology still rages.
 8

The positivist stance is that only the use of the scientific method
can provide the truth in its research, so sociologists must be
neutral, objective, or value-free in their outlook and not take sides
or make personal judgements. They maintain that the main focus
of sociologists is to take a firm and conscious position of
neutrality. Their foremost task is to discover and organize
knowledge about human behaviour. Moral, political, and other
significant convictions have to be set aside. What is essential in
the evaluation of any scientific work is not so much the
perspective but the degree to which the work has been carried
out with clear definitions and a systematic collection of the
material, so that an attempt can be made to assess the reliability
and validity of the observation.

Science requires the sociologist to be objective, to avoid bias

when interpreting data and investigation findings. To abandon
this position of ‘ethical neutrality’ is to relinquish the position of
sociology as the ‘queen of the social sciences’ and the ‘science
of the sciences.’ The activist sociologist challenges this position
and argues that it is impossible to be ‘value-free’ in contemporary
society. To be value-free is to support the status quo. This radical
view of sociology states that, sociologists’’ technical knowledge
puts them at a certain advantage in proposing and advocating
reforms.

They should, therefore, take the initiative and active leadership

in espousing the improvements of conditions for humankind and
the creation of a good society. Since sociologists have allowed
their talents, knowledge, and expertise to be availed of in
business and industry, they should now take an active role in
fighting for the cause of the underdog, the downtrodden, the
poor, the minorities, and the disadvantaged. These sociologists
rally their colleagues in the struggle against social injustice,
inequality, and any sort of abuse. To them, the sociologists’ main
role is to be an innovator in solving social problems.
 9

Sociological research cannot be value-free. It is difficult for one

to objectively study both sides; a study must inevitably lead to
bias. C. Wright Mills (1970) as mentioned by Marsh (1996:113)
pointed out that social scientists cannot avoid choices of values
in their research. Political and moral concerns are central to
sociology, hence, it is impossible to achieve value freedom.

In recent years, sociologists have become less hesitant to voice

out their findings, thus helping shape public policy. According to
De fleur, D’ Antonio, and De Fleur (1974:389), activism based on
the sociological knowledge has become increasingly acceptable
as the stature of their discipline has become more secure. Most
sociologists are now willing to make their vows known on public
issues, whether or not they wish to become actively involved in
seeking social reform. Kendall (2000:3-4) adds that all
sociologists still strive to discover patterns of behavior or
commonalities in human behaviour. Sociologists seek out the
multiple causes and effects of such behavior on all people.

The Future of Sociology

What are the trends and prospects of sociology in the 21st

century? How relevant is sociology in a world of increasing
globalization and rapid social and technological changes? In the
world today, particularly in the United States, sociological
perspective still remain diverse. Yet, despite all the niches today,
the core ideas from sociology’s first one hundred years of
theorizing can still be found. Some sociologists feel that
sociology will always hold out the promise of sociology, perhaps,
never to fully realize that theoretical attention to social problems
can help solve them. Whether sociology can once again become
important and relevant depends on the degree to which
sociologists of the 21st century begin to build anew on the
theoretical foundations provided by the first theorists (Turner,
Bieghley, and Power 1998:401-403). Sociologists support the
idea of a global sociology, going beyond the studies focused on
one’s country and developing a more comprehensive global
approach. Robert Af-Klineberg (1998:29-37) wrote of his field
 10

experiences from all over the world for over three decades, using
his sociological know-how and methodology in tackling issues in
rural development and the mitigating of natural and humanmade
disasters.

His observations bolstered his conviction that sociology is a

useful tool for studying problems brought about by social change.
He assert that because sociology is pragmatic and practical, the
need for it remains and is in the solution of social problems and
in helping people understand each other and themselves. In the
Philippines, sociology has moved toward a multi-disciplinary and
pluralistic approach in the 1990s. it is open to new
methodological and theoretical approaches and has been
involved in diverse issues, including the economic, political, and
social-psychological phenomena. Its loose boundaries,
increasing pluralism, and lack of a distinctive substantive
sociological focus in the discipline has led to speculations on the
demise of sociology in the 21st century, but this has been quickly
reputed by practitioners in the field.

David (1998:76-84) talks of our post-modern world where the forces of

globalization and information technology have encumbered one’s behavior
thinking due to the forces of speed. The usefulness of sociology for any kind
of meaningful social planning has been placed in doubt. In such a situation,
the conventional modernist paradigm may not work. But, there is still hope
for sociology of any kind of rethinking is made base on transformative politics
and social philosophy.

Bautista (1998) holds a similarly optimistic view on the future of

sociology. She affirms that sociologists, with their habits of
analytical and critical thinking coupled with the ‘sociological
imagination,’ will flourish in the 21st century. Sociologists
especially the younger ones, will continue to explore new
perspectives and methods and make use of their sociological
imagination.’

Bautista (1998) adds: Given the way sociology has developed

vis-à-vis other social science disciplines in the last four decades,
 11

sociologists will be at the forefront of research on critical issues

in a rapidly globalizing environment. They will pursue studies in
areas ranging from ergonomics, health, the environment,
women, deviance, and literature. They will never be engaged in
rethinking social arrangements and institutions in a new age, in
exploring cultural issues including questions of local or natural
heritage and roots, and in critiquing theoretical discourses and
implicit framework. They will be exposing the new generations to
debates on identity, memory, and the invention of self in a world
where familiar conventions will no longer hold and the routines
of daily living will have changed dramatically (Philippine
Sociological Review 46 [Jan.-June. 1998] Nos. 1-2. pp72).

END OF KUYA PATRICK’S PART

Summary

Sociology is the outcome of people’s search for a valid, reliable, and

precise knowledge about people and society. It developed from the
attempts of social thinkers to build up a science of society by developing
sociological theories and methods of data gathering. It is the science of
society and the social interactions taking place. As a science of society,
it studies behavior, social issues, and problems arising from social
change. With the leaps in science and technology, particularly in
communications, countries have been drawn closer together. Thus
sociology stresses a global-perspective.

The study of sociology broadens our experiences, and we learn

to discard our prejudices and develop a broad attitude toward
people and events. We acquire the ‘sociological imagination’
which enables us to understand the relationship between
individual and society and to see things beyond our established
norms.

Auguste Comte, a French social philosopher, gave the name

sociology and advocated the use of positivism or the scientific
method in the study of social phenomena. Karl Marx, a German
 12

economist, analysed that history is a continuing struggle

between conflicting ideas and forces and of social classes. He
believed that the bourgeoisie and the elite exploit the proletariat
or the laborers, and that the basic cause of the conflict is
economic. Emile Durkheim, another French thinker, made use of
the scientific method in studying phenomena such as suicide,
religion, and division of labor.

A number of theories have been formulated in the study of

society. Among them are structural-functionalism, conflict theory
and symbolic interactionism. In the 1960s and 1970s, feminist
theorists pointed to gender inequalities in resource access and
management. Attempts to unify these diverse theoretical
perspectives were made, but failed.

As we stand in the 21st century, sociology is still relevant in a

world of increasing globalization, despite diverse theoretical
perspectives. In the Philippines, sociology has been open to new
methodological and theoretical approaches and involved in
multidisciplinary researches. The idea of indigenous concepts
and theories is being promoted.

Study Guide

1. What is sociology? What is social phenomena and social issues

does the sociologists focus attention on?
2. Why study sociology?
3. Explain Mill’s “sociological imagination.”
4. How is sociology related to other social sciences in contributing
to an understanding of ourselves and the society we live in?
5. Discuss the various sociological perspectives in the study of
social phenomena and society.
6. Trace the development of sociology as a science. How did
sociology develop in the Philippines?
7. What are the trends and prospects of sociology in 21st century?
13