Utang na loob

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Utang na loob is a Filipino cultural trait which which, when translated literally, means "a debt of one's inner self (loob)."[1] It
is also often translated as a "debt of gratitude." [2]

In the study of Filipino psychology, utang na loob is considered an important "accommodative surface value", along
with hiya (propriety/dignity) and pakikisama (companionship/esteem). It is one of the values by which Filipinos
accommodate the demands of the world around them as opposed to its counterpart grouping, referred to as the
"confrontative surface values", which include values such as lakas ng loob and pakikibaka.[1]

The essence of utang na loob is an obligation to appropriately repay a person who has done one a favor. The favors which
elicit the Filipino's sense of utang na loob are typically those whose value is impossible to quantify, or, if there is a
quantifiable value involved, involves a deeply personal internal dimension. [3] This internal dimension, loob,
differentiates utang na loob from an ordinary utang (debt); being an internal phenomenon, utang na loob thus goes much
deeper than ordinary debt or even the western concept of owing a favor. Filipino psychology explains that this is a reflection
of the kapwa orientation of shared personhood or shared self, which is at the core of the Filipino values system. [1]

References[edit]

1. ^ Jump up to:a b c de Guia, Katrin (2005). Kapwa: The Self in the Other: Worldviews and Lifestyles of
Filipino Culture-Bearers. Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, Inc. p. 378. ISBN 971-27-1490-X.

2. Jump up^ http://globalnation.inquirer.net/144845/a-filipino-american-recovers-his-kapwa

3. Jump up^ Borja-Slark, Aileen (January 27, 2008). "Reciprocity and The Concept of Filipino "Utang na
Loob "". Filipino-Western Relationships. www.western-asian.com. Archived from the originalon December 27,
2008. Retrieved February 5, 2009.

The Irrationality of Utang na Loob

Posted on 26 May 2014 by Dustin Celestino.

I. Invisible Debt

There is a uniquely Filipino concept that is often brought up when a persons relationship with his or her parents is strained:
Utang na Loob. It is the idea that a child owes his or her parents for providing him an education, clothing, shelter, comfort
and love. Initially, I thought that this particular notion is unique to the Filipino experience. However, Ive learned that there is
a concept in the West that is quite similar. Its called, Invisible Debt.

Huffington Posts Ashley Ryan wrote the article Free Yourself From Emotional Debt: Move Beyond Pain From the Past in
an attempt to differentiate invisible debt from regular debt. She writes, We all know what debt is. Some of us, most of us,
still have a few were paying off. Student loans, car payments, mortgages. But what about the unseen debts, debts that are
invisible to the naked eye but instead live within our hearts?
What shes talking about here is the debt a person incurs from negative experiences. The father who walks out on his family,
whose approval the child is still seeking; and the mother who was over-critical, so the child overworks to prove that he is
worthy of her love are both examples of this sort of debt.

The Filipino version, however, is more insidious, especially when it involves an abusive parent. In many cases, not only
does a child have to endure the fleeting whims of his or her parents (who may have had the best intentions, but dont really
know what the fuck theyre doing), the child is expected to be grateful as well for being provided basic needs.

The issue with invisible debt or utang na loob, as it has been discussed in many blogs, is that it has an unlimited cost.
Unlike a common loan, one is never certain how much more has to be paid, or when the loan will expire. The question I am
asking is, Is it rational/ethical for a parent to bring up utang na loob?

Before I continue, I would first like to mention that I dont have terrible parents. In fact, I am very lucky to have been raised
by well-meaning, understanding, mostly rational, human beings with only average imperfections. Ive had conflicts with my
parents, more or less, as much as the average human being has. I am grateful for everything that I have been provided. I
just had to mention that, because in many instances throughout this article, Im going to sound like an ingrate, especially as
soon as I mention my position:

I am grateful that I have been provided an education, clothing, shelter, comfort and love. However, I do not owe my parents
because they provided me these things. Its a parents job to provide these things. People who cant provide for these needs
should not have children to begin with. These are basic childrens rights.

I believe that utang na loob has no place in the parent-child relationship. I think its inappropriate for parents to demand a
return of investment. Parents should not ask payment for products and services they were supposed to provide their
children for free.

Now, I know I sound like an asshole. Let me clarify. I intend to take care of my parents when they are old, but not because I
owe them utang na loob, but because I love them. The problem comes when parents expect their children to love them
eternally, by default, simply because they did what they were supposed to do as parents raise their children.

According to the blog, The Invisible Scar, A good parent offers unconditional love and support; an emotionally abusive
parent demands unconditional love and support from his/her child.

When parents decide to have children, they also decide that they will give a child, who cant fend for himself, access to
basic needs. Asking for a guaranteed return on the provision of these needs is like asking someone to sign a contract
before he could read. The basis for accountability should always be choice. However, in the case of children and parents,
only one party was involved in the decision making: parents chose to have children, but children didnt choose to have
parents. Why then should children be held accountable, why should they be held in debt, for choices that their parents
made?

For those who dont get it yet, let me point out the obvious: The utang na loob parents often bring up to emotionally
blackmail their children is not only irrational & unreasonable, its also unethical.
II. Why is it unethical?

The notion of the invisible debt or utang na loob is a form of abuse. Not all forms of parental abuse are physical. There
are things that a parent can do to cause severe psychological damage on the child. The blog, Invisible Scar defines
psychological abuse as, a pattern of intentional verbal or behavioral actions or lack of actions that convey to a child the
message that he or she is worthless, flawed, unloved, unwanted, endangered, or only of value to meet someone elses
needs.

Utang na Loob implies that a child was provided basic needs, not because he or she is loved, but because there is an
expected return. You owe us, therefore, you should pay us back. This particular demand is irrational and cruel. It also turns
love and affection into an economic resource. A child-parent bond is commodified by putting an invisible price tag on the
relationship.

Its very Catholic, in a sense, because its reminiscent of Original Sin. Its a debt you didnt earn, but its one you have to
try, for your entire lifetime, to pay for anyway. Otherwise, you are a bad person. And like Original Sin, it will impose
standards of moral perfection that you can never live up to. Whatever you do, you will always be a sinner until God decides
that you are not.

Similarly, you will always have utang na loob, until your parents decide that you dont. If you disobey an irrational demand,
Wala kang utang na loob. If you select a partner your parents do not favor, Wala kang utang na loob. If you decide to
move out sooner than your parents want you to, Wala kang utang na loob. If you disobey any of their wishes (whether or
not these wishes are reasonable), Wala kang utang na loob.

But what is this utang na loob parents speak of? What are the parameters of this debt and how is this debt paid? The truth
is it doesnt exist. You do not owe your parents utang na loob for raising you. Thats a parents job. Some parents do the
job well, and some parents dont. Parents who do the job well deserve your gratitude and praise, but they are not entitled to
your unconditional obedience. They cant be allowed to make decisions for you as an adult, according to their desires, just
because they did their job when you were a child. Your duty, if there be any, should be towards your own children if
someday you decide to have kids of your own.

My parents deserve my gratitude and praise for being the best parents I could ask for. But, as an adult, I deserve to live my
life according to my will, not theirs. Utang na loob is not a commodity a parent could trade to acquire a childs
unconditional obedience.

If there is anything that should demand obedience, it is not debt. It is reason.

Sources:

Ryan, A. (2013, March). Free Yourself From Emotional Debt: Move Beyond Pain From the Past. Retrieved on May 26,
2014. From: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ashley-ryan/emotional-wellness_b_2939928.html

The Invisible Scar (2014, February). The Silent Treatment [Types of Emotional Child Abuse Series, Part 1]. Retrieved on
May 26, 2014. From: http://theinvisiblescar.wordpress.com/tag/withholding-2/

Images Borrowed From:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-
09PIUpTGChU/UyG9NKnyAsI/AAAAAAAAA30/zTraVxX4oQw/s1600/1240202_545802765475613_835693128_n.jp

VALUE PHILOSOPHY

A brief introduction to the philosophy of human values is necessary for an understanding of Filipino values and values
education. A Filipino experiencesfamily closeness and solidarity (pagpapahalaga sa pamilya), politeness (use of po or
ho), hospitality (tuloy po kayo), gratitude (utang na loob) from "within", that is, subjectively and emotionally, unlike a non-
Filipino observer, social scientist, or psychologist who studies Filipino values objectively from "without" or "from a distance".

Such Filipino values as social acceptance, (pakikisama, amor propio, economic security, pagmamay-ari), and trust in
God (paniniwala sa Diyos, bathala or Maykapal) find their philosophical basis in man's dynamic openness toward nature
and the world (e.g., the value of hanap-buhay ng magsasaka), one's fellowmen (the values of paggalang, hiya, katarungan,
pag-ibig), and God (the values of pananampalataya, pananalangin, kabanalan).

This dynamic openness of man is an openness to the possibilities of the future. That is why values are something
to be realized. Take the value of peace. The Philippine situation is now characterized by insurgency; conflict between the
NPA, the MNLF and the AFP; vigilante groups; hostility and division--in short, an absence of national peace and order.
Human values are not merely private. All values have a social aspect. The government official who
demands porsiyento, the fireman or policeman who extorts tong or lagay for a service which is his duty, all contribute to the
worsening graft and corruption. We are all responsible for one another (tayong lahat ay may pananagutan sa isa't-isa).

Values are both subjective and objective. They involve a subject or person who values (e.g., a young girl) and an object
or value to be realized (e.g.,pagkamahinhin). Justice is objective because it is a value that should be realized by all. It also
becomes subjective if justice becomes a value for me. There is an objective difference between value and disvalue,
pleasure and pain, life and death, poverty and affluence, heroism and cowardice, truth and error, right and wrong, holiness
and sinfulness. The difference is not only in the mind or a matter of personal taste or preference. Even if I close my
eyes to the ugly poverty around me, the poor will not disappear.

Values are not objective in the sense that they are found in some static heaven:they are relational and embodied in
person-value-types (ideal moral persons). For example, to a tipong-mukhang kuarta [an avaricious look] profit is more
important than service; to a tipong-politiko [political type], pera [money], propaganda, politika [politics] are more valuable
than honesty; tipong siyentipiko [scientist type] or tipong-artista [actor type] personify agham [science] and sining [art];
tipong madasalin [pious type] may exemplify kabanalan (piety).

Cory Aquino embodied all that we wanted our President to be--credible, honest, just, with a strong faith in God and in our
people. The ideal type or Filipino model during the "parliament of the streets" was the tipong-maka-Diyos (religions),
makatao (people-oriented), makabayan (nationalistic).

The heroes of EDSA placed the good of the Filipino people before the safety and security of their families. They were willing
to risk their lives for God and people.Value-ranking or the priority of values is not merely arbitrary or subjective. There
is an objective ranking of values based on existence or reality and other objective criteria.

Using the criteria of permanence, ability to be shared, and depth of satisfaction,Max Scheler ranked human values from the
lowest to the highest as follows:(3)sense values like sensual pleasure are exemplified by the lakuatsero or pabling;utilitarian
values like profit and efficiency by the businessman and technocrat; life values, by the doctor and the hero, e.g., Dr. Bobby
de la Paz and Emilio Jacinto; cultural values, by the genius and the artist, e.g., Jose Rizal and Francisco Balagtas;
religious values, by the saint, e.g., Mother Teresa or Lorenzo Ruiz.Moral and religious values are pre-eminent and claim
the highest priority in the objective scale of values because they are absolutely necessary in order to become fully
human (magpakatao).

***********************

FILIPINO VALUES: NATURE, CONSTELLATION AND CONTEXT

What are Filipino values? What is distinctly Filipino in our value system? The Filipino value system arises from our
culture or way of life, our distinctive way of becoming human in this particular place and time. We speak of Filipino values
in a fourfold sense.
First, although mankind shares universal human values, it is obvious that certain values take on for us a distinctively Filipino
flavor. The Greek ideal of moderation or meden agan, the Roman in medio stat virtus, the Confucian and Buddhist"doctrine
of the Middle", find their Filipino equivalent in hindi labis, hindi kulang, katamtaman lamang.

Secondly, when we speak of Filipino values, we do not mean that elements of these Filipino values are absent in the
value systems of other peoples and cultures. All people eat, talk and sing, but they eat different foods, speak various
languages and sing different songs. Thus, we easily recognize Filipino, American, Chinese, Japanese or any other foreign
food, language or music. The difference lies in the way these elements are ranked, combined or emphasized so that
they take on a distinctively Filipino slant or cast.

For instance, in China, honesty and hard work may rank highest; Chinese and Japanese cultures give great value to
politeness and beauty; American culture to promptness and efficiency; and Filipino culture to trust in God and family
centeredness. In this sense of value-ranking and priority of values, we can speak of dominant Filipino values.

Thirdly, universal human values in a Filipino context (historical, cultural, socio-economic, political, moral and religious) take
on a distinctive set of Filipino meanings and motivations. This is true not only of the aims and goals, beliefs, convictions,
and social principles of the traditional value system of the lowland rural family(4) but also of what Fr. Horacio de la
Costa, S.J. calls the Filipino"nationalistic" tradition (pagsasarili, pagkakaisa, pakikisama, pakikipagkapwa-tao, and
pagkabayani.(5)