Online classroom of Ronald Castillo y Maglaqui, Professor of Political Science at the University of Santo Tomas - Faculty of Arts and Letters. But for the time being, starting 2022, this blog serves as a student's public notebook of thoughts while he undertakes his international PhD in Asia Pacific Studies at National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan. Reach him through rmcastillo@ust.edu.ph
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Technical Committee on the National Hero 2Pol2
Posting for the proceedings of the simulation for the criteria and need for a national hero.
1. Same rules apply as the previous activity..
2. I will be giving particular attention to those who have not been given a chance to recite.
3. Since we had to stop abruptly, you may add personal inputs (must be insightful).
4. Deadline is December 27, 2012, 8:00 p.m.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
INOCENTES, Carlo Luigi B.
ReplyDeleteTEC, Natasha Kim R.
Criteria and need for a National Hero
1.0 The necessity of having a national hero
1.1 Arguments that support the need for a national hero.
1.1.1 According to Delos Santos, Having a national hero leads to the awakening of the spirit of the people and it ignites the flame in people’s hearts for a passionate revolution.
1.1.2 Ramos says, a national hero serves as an icon for the people. They become the person that the people measure up to.
1.1.3 As stipulated by Gimao, a national hero constitutes as a strong pillar for our national identity and contributes to the development of the people’s quality of life.
1.1.4 As stated by Inocentes, a national her functions as a glimmer hope for all of us Filipinos, especially in the prospect of attaining freedom.
1.2 Arguments that oppose the need for a national hero.
1.2.1 As argued by De Villa, a national hero is not special for all Filipinos with every bit of sacrifice that they give to their country could be one.
2.0 Arguments that express the criteria of a national hero
2.1 According to Maragay, a national hero is someone who loves his nation and someone who cares for his people’s dignity, freedom and unity.
2.2 Bisco says, a national hero is a person who has the inclined ability to strengthen the will of his/her people.
2.3 As put forward by Ramos and Perez, a national hero is willing to make major sacrifices for his cause, to the extent of giving up his own life.
2.4 Corpuz and Cando articulated that a hero must be a calm thinker and with this valuable trait should serve as an inspiration.
2.5 The necessity of death.
2.5.1 A hero should be dead.
2.5.1.1 As Galvez asserts, the noblest form of sacrifice for the country is thru one’s death
2.5.1.2 As supported by Regencia, the death of the national hero assures the purity of the legacy of his/her life wherein it may no longer be tarnished in the future.
2.5.2 According to Pormento, a national hero could be declared even before his/her death for value should be put to the person’s act of heroism regardless of what happens after.
2.6 The necessity of Violence.
2.6.1 According to Galvez, the title of a national hero could be achieved through a person who uses non-violent means; pens are most often mightier than swords.
2.6.2 As Tec declared, the title of a national hero could never be achieved without violent means. Blood is the seal that stamps the unparalleled sacrifice that only a national hero gives.
2.7 Lastly Atienza believed that a national hero should think for the future of the country. They should have a long- term mind set.
1. Technical Committee on the National Hero
ReplyDelete1.1. Committee on Argumentation and Debate
1.2. Committee for the criteria and the need for a national hero
2. Criteria for Choosing a National Hero
2.1. According to the Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee (1993-1995)
2.1.1. Heroes are those who have a concept of nation and thereafter aspire and struggle for nation's freedom.
2.1.2. Heroes are those who define and contribute to a system or life of freedom and order for a nation.
2.1.3. Heroes are those who contribute to the quality of life and destiny of a nation.
2.2. Additional Criteria
2.2.1. A hero is a part of the people's expression.
2.2.2. A hero thinks of the future, especially the future generations.
2.2.3. The choice of a hero involves not only the recounting of an episode or events in history, but of the entire process that made this particular person a hero.
3. Who declared Rizal as a National hero?
3.1. "The Americans helped the Filipinos to choose Rizal as a National Hero" (Cando, 2012).
3.2. "On the other hand, the one who declared Rizal as a national hero is Emilio Aguinaldo" (Barcenas, 2012).
4. Why do we need to have a National Hero?
4.1. In favor to have a national hero
4.1.1. "In order to awaken the spirit of Filipino nationalism" (De los Santos, 2012).
4.1.2. "In order to serve as models to the Filipino people" (Erese, 2012).
4.1.3. "In order to constitute a pillar of national identity and contribute to the development of people's quality of life" (Gimao, 2012).
4.1.4. "In order to serve as 'icons' for Philippine patriotism" (Ramos, 2012).
4.1.5. "In order to serve as an inspiration for the people" (Galvez, 2012).
4.2. In contrast to have a national hero
4.2.1. "We don't favor national heroes bec. they only do what they do for the benefit of many Filipinos and not the entirety of the nation" (De Villa, 2012).
5. What should be the characteristics of a National Hero?
5.1. "A national hero must strengthen the will of his/her people" (Bisco, 2012).
5.2. National heroes must not emerge from 'somewhere'; he must be concern with the integrity of his/her people and in return the Filipino people must embody the essence of their fruitful efforts" (Maragay, 2012).
5.3. "A national hero must be a symbol of freedom among its fellowmen" (Inocentes, 2012).
5.4. "A national hero must be dead" (Regencia, 2012).
5.4.1. "A noble death asserts the heroism of the national hero" (Galvez, 2012).
5.5. In contrast to Mr. Regencia's argument, Corpuz (2012) stated that "a national hero doesn't need to be dead".
5.5.1. "A hero must be calm and have a valuable trait, creating an important innovation for the betterment of his/her society" (Corpuz and Cando, 2012).
5.5.2. "An individual who is worthy to become a national hero can already be declared as one even before his/her death so that he/she may serve as living models among others" (Pormiento, 2012).
5.6. "A national hero must be willing to sacrifice for his/her nation" (Perez and Ramos, 2012).
5.7. On the Notion of Using Violence
5.7.1. "A national hero deosn't need to use violence, instead he/she must be intellectually capable of mobilizing the development of his/her nation (ex. Ninoy Aquino)" (Emeterio, 2012).
5.7.2. "As our national hero says 'the pen is mightier than the sword', to become a national hero does not entail the use of violence" (Galvez, 2012)
5.7.3. On the contrary, Tec (2012) states that "violence is part of being a national hero, following the use of blood and sacrifice".
5.8. "A national hero must have a mind that thinks the good of his/her people on a long-term basis, and this makes the heroes 'special' of their kind" (Atienza, 2012).
- MIGUEL, Nicole Kenneth C.
To start it off, let me present to you the arguments in for the characteristic of a National Hero. According to Horcajo, a national hero is someone who is able to inform the Filipino people and the people’s spirits and hearts into a revolution. Furthermore, Erese put into context the characteristic of a national hero as a society and nation loving. Moreover, Pangan has substantiated the arguments by pointing that national hero is a symbol of unity for people. In addition, Ramos vindicated that national hero is not a symbol of unity, thus, icon of selfless service. Galvez made the arguments more concrete by saying that, a hero should be the one who will change history and life of the Filipino people for a better society. Lastly, Inocentes added up that a hero is a symbol of freedom, like Rizal who fought against the Spaniards in the attainment of freedom.
ReplyDeleteMoving on to a deeper discussion, the necessity for a national hero has been discussed. According to Erese, national heroes are needed because they are models to citizens, who will mold up the beliefs of the people. Pangan asserted that heroes are the ones who will unite the nation, thus, they will be the one who will solidify the sense of patriotism and nationalism. Moreover, Bisco supported Pangan saying that national heroes are important because they will strengthen nationalism among the people. Ramoz explained that declaring national heroes are like declaring saints in the church. They are proclaimed according to the life they have lived, thus, a hero has sacrificed and done a selfless deed. Gimao put into context that heroes help us build our national identity. A national identity is something that will be recognized among the countries around the globe. Galvez elucidated the point that we need someone that will inspire us, and these are the national heroes. Lastly, Perez also mentioned the importance of willingness to sacrifice for the benefit of others and the legacy that he will leave.
On the other hand, there are arguments that point the inconsequentiality of national heroes for the country. Maragay argued that national heroes are not needed. The literature that says the nationalism of the people and has set the standards for the national heroes, it must not reside only on those literatures. Because there are little things that can be considered as nationalist in nature and the doer can be considered as national hero. We must see the act. Furthermore, De Villa pointed out that national hero isn’t needed. There’s no special in sacrificing and giving love for your country, because according to him, it’s the responsibility of the people to do that. Hence, national heroes aren’t important.
Cando mentioned the criteria of the Americans for National Heroes:
1. He must be dead.
2. He must be a Filipino.
3. Has solid patriotism.
Regencia supported this that through death, it will leave mark on the spirits of the Filipinos, thus, will change the views of the people. As additional point of view, usually the sacrifices made ny the heroes lead to their death. However, the death is recognized by his constituents.
In opposition about the hero must be dead, Pormento disagreed with this. A person can be declared a hero, even though he’s still alive, as long as he contributes to the improvement and betterment of the people. And hero is someone that people look up tp. Perez supported this by saying that Efren Penaflorida is a living national hero. He is a man who has a strong patriotism and uplifts the spirits of the Filipino.
Other insights have been mentioned. Emeterio opens up the motion that Ninoy Aquino can be qualified as a national hero because he had fought for the freedom of the people and sacrificed his life. Hence, he can be considered as one. Corpuz explains that a national hero is a calm-thinker, like Rizal, the hero who didn’t use violence. Lastly, Atienza point that a national hero should think long-term. He thinks about the future generation and future events.
Corpuz, Ena P.
ReplyDeleteLaurel, Anne Medlyn C.
Makabali, Avon Cherie B.
1. Who declared Rizal as our National hero?
1.1 According to Cando the Americans were the ones who helped the Filipinos in choosing Rizal as a National hero.
1.2 Barcenas argued that according to Brian Jones, Emilio Aguinaldo declared Rizal as national hero before the Americans sponsored the committee.
2. Why do we need to have national heroes?
2.1 Arguments in favor of having national heroes
2.1.1 According to De los Santos, having a national hero awakens the spirit of the Filipinos.
2.1.2 Erese stated that we need National heroes to serve as models in the society.
2.1.3 Pangan believed that a National hero is a symbol of unity that aims to unite our nation.
2.1.4 As stated by Ramos, heroes are like saints because their martyrdom makes them a hero just like what saints do. They die because of their strong nationalism.
2.1.5 Gimao said that national heroes contribute to the quality of life.
2.1.6 According to Galvez, we need heroes because they are marks of the history and change. They serve as an inspiration.
2.2 Arguments that oppose the idea of having national heroes
2.2.1 As argued by De Villa, we do not need heroes. For him heroes are not special because he believes that that it is our obligation to defend our nation.
2.2.2 Maragay also argued that we do not need heroes. It just so happens that there are circumstances that made them heroes.
3. Criteria for a National hero
3.1 One of the criteria according to Bisco is that a national hero must have the ability to strengthen the will of the people.
3.2 Maragay stated that a national hero is a person who loves his nation and cares for the dignity, freedom, and unity of his people.
3.3 Innocentes said that a national hero is one that defends our country and freedom.
3.4 According to Ramos and Perez, a national hero is willing to give up his life for the sake of his nation.
3.5 As said by Corpuz and Cando, a hero must be calm and must possess a valuable trait.
3.6 According to Cando a hero must be dead.
3.6.1 Galvez said that the noblest form of nationalism is through one’s death.
3.6.2 As supported by Regencia, the death of a hero can stay in the minds of the people for a long time.
3.6.3 Pormento disagreed with this and argued that a person can still be declared a hero even if he is not yet dead as long as he does things for the betterment of his people.
3.6.4 Perez supported the idea of Pormento and gave an example of a living national hero which is Efren Penaflorida.
3.6.5 According to Makabali, Taft said that Aguinaldo might be anti colonialism because he also fought for the freedom of the Filipinos. If he was declared as the national hero, he might contradict the plans of the Americans. Besides, Rizal was already dead so he won’t be able to tarnish his name and reputation.
3.7 Atienza argued that a person should not be dead just to be called a hero. Like singers, they are not called great when they are gone but when they perform.
3.8 According to Atienza, a hero should think for a long term not short lived.
3.8.1 Makabali said Rizal was also considered a hero while he was 8 years old when he wrote the poem “para sa aking mga kababata”. He already showed nationalism at that young age.
In addition to the reason why we need a national hero, Laurel said that we need national heroes because we need people to look up to, someone who will inspire us to love and care for our country and to ignite our hearts to aspire change in the society.
Bisco, Jodelyn E.
ReplyDelete1. The people who declared Rizal as the National Hero
1.1 According to Cando, the Americans guided the Filipinos in choosing the national Hero which is Rizal
1.2 Barcenas argued that Emilio Aguinaldo declared Rizal as earlier than the Americans.
2. Necessity of having a national hero
2.1 Arguments that support the need for a national hero
2.1.1 According to Delos Santos, Having a national hero leads to the awakening of the spirit of the people,he also added that it ignites the flame in people’s hearts for a passionate revolution
2.1.2 Erese added that national heroes are needed in order to serve as models to the Filipino people
2.1.3 Gimao added that a national hero constitutes as a strong pillar for our national identity
2.1.4 Ramos states that a national hero serves as an icon for the Filipino people
2.1.5 According to Inocentes, a national hero functions as a glimmer hope for all of us Filipinos, especially in the prospect of attaining freedom
2.1.6 Galves added that national heroes serves as an inspiration
2.2 Arguments that oppose the need for a national hero
2.2.1 De Villa argued that national heroes are not especial and are not needed.
2.2.2 Maragay also added that national heroes only existed because of some circumstances
3. Criteria for Choosing a National Hero
3.1. Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee (1993-1995)
3.1.1. Heroes are those who have a concept of nation and thereafter aspire and struggle for nation's freedom
3.1.2. Heroes are those who define and contribute to a system or life of freedom and order for a nation
3.1.3. Heroes are those who contribute to the quality of life and destiny of a nation
3.2. Additional Criteria
3.2.1. A hero is a part of the people's expression
3.2.2. A hero thinks of the future, especially the future generations
3.2.3. The choice of a hero involves not only the recounting of an episode or events in history, but of the entire process that made this particular person a hero
4. Characteristics of a National Hero
4.1 Bisco says that a national hero is a person who has the inclined ability to strengthen the will of his/her people
4.2 Maragay added that a national hero is someone who loves and cares for his nation
4.3 According to Inocentes, a national hero must be a symbol of freedom among its fellowmen
4.4 Ramos and Perez stated that a national hero is willing to die for the sake of his/her nation
4.5 Corpuz and Candoadded that a hero must be calm and possess a valuable trait
4.6 Cando says that in order for one to become a National Hero, that person must be dead
4.6.1 Galvez supported and said that the noblest form of nationalism is death
4.6.2 Regencia added that death can stay in one's minds for a long time
4.6.3 Pormeianto and Perez disagreed and stated that a person can still be a hero even though he/she is alive and gives examples
5 The necessity of Violence.
5.1 According to Galvez, the title of a national hero could be achieved through a person who uses non-violent means
5.2 Tec argued that the title of a national hero could never be achieved without violent means
5.3 Finally, Atienza believed that a national hero should think for the future of the country
ALJON G. PANGAN
ReplyDelete~~ 2POL2 ~~
A technical committee on national hero had been formed to deliberate upon the criteria that should be considered in choosing the national hero of the Philippines, and the very significance of having one.
The deliberation could not go any further without laying down the foundations of the discussion. Horcajo started the ball rolling by claiming that a national hero is someone who has the capacity to influence the people and ignite the Filipino nationalist spirit within them, most especially through a revolution during the Spanish conquest at that time. Erese added that a national hero must serve as a 'model' of the whole population. Pangan, then, substantiated the previous claims that a national hero is someone who possesses a solid sense of patriotism and nationalism for his country, thus a symbol of unity to the people. On a similar note, Ramos added that a national hero is proclaimed as a national hero because of fighting for his country, just like the saints who've died for fighting for their faith. Thus, Galvez, for her, stated that a national hero must serve as an 'inspiration' throughout the course of time, changing the history for a better present and future. On another note, Innocentes pointed out that a national hero is someone who serves to be a symbol of freedom to the people.
Why do we need a national hero? -- another vital question to partake in the deliberation of about forming the criteria of considering one as a national hero. Delos Santos believed that we need to have a national hero to serve as an agent to awaken the nationalistic spirit within us. In addition, Bisco and Pangan also thought that they will be able to contribute in intensifying our nationalist spirits. Thus, with all the similar views raised, Gimao claimed that there is a need for us to have a national hero to be able to establish a sturdy national identity of our own and to contribute to the development of the people's quality of life. Lastly, Galvez and Perez believed that we need a national hero to be an inspiration to us all and to carry on our country's legacy, respectively.
Presently, it is Dr. Jose Rizal who stands to be the national hero of our beloved country. However, there is still a debate regarding on who declared him to be our national hero. Cando said that it was the commission headed by William H. Taft who chose Rizal to be the national hero of the Philippines for the purpose of showing a Filipino model. Of course, there had been underlying points that they considered on choosing Rizal. On the other hand, Barcenas believed that it was Aguinaldo who chose Rizal to serve as the Philippine national hero. The discussion, then, moved on to deliberating about the criteria that should be made into consideration in choosing our national hero. Cando presented three factors that the Americans have considered in choosing our national hero: must be a Filipino, must be dead, and must have a strong sense of patriotism. Corpuz contradicted the claim that a national hero must be dead. However, Regencia believed that without being dead, the 'honor' or 'title' given to a particular person deemed to be the national hero of our country could possible be tarnished by a single mistake if he is still living. Galvez, in support to Regencia, said that a noble death, by fighting for his own country, signifies heroism. Violence, for Emeterio and Galvez is not a requisite in becoming a national hero. As reiterated by Emeterio, one should only be able to control and contribute to the development of the people. Most importantly, Ramos and Perez believed that being able to make sacrifices for his own country matters the most in becoming a national hero. As what Maragay had stated, what truly matters is the 'act' itself. Lastly, Atienza pointed out that to be a national hero, one must be able to think not only for the matters of the present, but also for the future -- he should think of the good of the many for a longer basis.
ReplyDeleteToday, there are 10 criteria that the National Historical Commission of the Philippines are considering in choosing someone to be proclaimed as our national hero: The criteria is composed of 10 standards: First is the extent of a person’s sacrifices for the welfare of the country. Second, the motive and methods employed in the attainment of the ideal (was his ideal purely for the welfare of the country and without any taint of self-interested motives, most of all the method of attainment should be morally valid). The third is the moral character of the person concerned (the person should not have any immorality issue that affected his ideal). The fourth is the influence of the person concerned on his age and or the succeeding age. Fifth is that heroes are those who have a concept of nation and thereafter aspire and struggle for the nation’s freedom (they must have desired the country’s freedom in any situation especially when there’s a threat of invasion in any form). Sixth is that heroes are those who define and contribute to a system of life of freedom and order for a nation (one who helps in the orderliness and betterment of the country). Seventh is, heroes are those who contribute to the quality of life and destiny of a nation. Eight, a hero is part of the people’s expression (the citizen must have recognized and acknowledged the person as a hero). Ninth, a hero thinks of the future, especially the future generations, his concern for the future generations must be seen in his decisions and ideals). Lastly, the choice of a hero involves not only the recounting of an episode or events in history, but of the entire process that made this particular person a hero. (http://www.nhcp.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5)
To me, what truly matters is the capability of one to INSPIRE others, to IGNITE the Filipino nationalist spirit within them. Because having a strong sense of patriotism and nationalism on you 'own' would have no bearing at all for the many if you were not able to share your own nationalist sentiment. I, therefore, think that being a national hero is about being able to inspire your fellow Filipino men to ACT and fight for what is right, fight for what your TRUE Filipino spirit dictates upon you.
ReplyDeleteCRUZ, Mary Abigail S.
ReplyDeleteDOÑA, Rose Anne
GONZALEZ, Jed Nathaniel
On December 19, 2012, the 2012 Technical Committee on National Heroes held a meeting at Room 119 of St. Raymund’s Building of the University of Santo Tomas at exactly 11:00 am up to 12:00 pm. The reason for the meeting was to create a new set of requirements on what should be the characteristics of a hero and why do we need heroes.
The Honorable Over-all Chairperson started the meeting with these issues that must be resolved and handed the floor to the Chairperson Romano. He gave the floor to Horcajo who argued that “Rizal has the characteristics to be a hero since stirred the hearts of the Filipinos to unite and revolt against the Spaniards as according to the requirements or criteria agreed by the previous technical committee”. Pormento takes the floor to remind the committee that today is December 19, 2012. Erese believes that we do need heroes. Pangan agrees with the previous speaker since heroes “help us unite our nation”. He further argues that a hero must possess a “strong sense of nationalism and patriotism”. Bisco agrees with the criteria and the reason behind it proposed by Pangan.
Ramos contends that a hero must be an “icon of nationalism, sacrificial, selfless and saintly”. Gimao proposed that a hero should be able to “build a national identity and the he/she should be able to contribute the quality of life as Filipinos”. Maragay counter proposes that we do not need heroes since “Rizal did not really help us for his ideals are just fallacies”. He further proposes that if we should need heroes, they should be loving and caring for the country and their acts must be death defying and is witnessed by the people.
Cando debates that a hero should be “dead, patriotic, and a conflicting person”. Galvez believes that a hero is necessary since they change the course of our history. She further argues that a “revolution is necessary but not war to show nationalism”. Inocentes suggests that a hero must be a “symbol of freedom, patriotic and defended our nation” against the foreign invaders. Regencia supports Cando in her argument that a hero must be dead so as “not to tarnish his name” since that will make the notion of a hero futile.
Emeterio summarizes the others arguments and proposes that Ninoy Aquino be deemed also as a national hero for he “fought for the Filipinos”. disputes and agrees with Maragay that we don’t need heroes because he believes that “there’s nothing special about them and that they just did what a Filipino should do”.
Plopinio summarizes the debate and agrees with the other speakers that we do need heroes because of the reasons stated a while ago. Perez complies with the other speakers that a hero should “strengthen the national identity, has the willingness to sacrifice his life as according to The Filipino Blog by Social Scientists which also indicates why Rizal is our hero and criticisms on why Aguinaldo or Bonifacio should not be our hero. Corpuz recommends that a hero should be a “calm thinker, and he didn’t revolt”.
Pormento opposes the Cando’s proposal that a hero must be dead for he believes that a hero should be alive enough to be a living model of what a hero should be and presents Rep. Pacquiao as a proof to his argument. He further proposes that Rep. Pacquiao must be added to the list of our national heroes for his excellence in giving our nation the pride of being one of the best fighters in the world. Lastly, Atienza advocates that in deliberating for a criterion to be a hero, we must “think about the reforms for the long term”. She declines the idea that a hero must be dead since the “characteristics of a hero should be the important aspect of being one”. She also disagrees with De Villa’s argument that heroes are not special because “it is the heroes who do what we should do but we don’t do making them special”.
In line with this, we would like to propose that if we should need some new criteria, we must create one according to the problems and issues that needs to be addressed on our current times. The technical committee during President Ramos’ regime discussed about the criteria of the heroes during the era of Colonialism. Since that era has already passed and we now live in the modern era, our new criteria should be in lined with the new era. Therefore, we propose that our national hero must be able to change the system of our degenerating society. He/She must be able to change the hearts of the corrupt and must be able to bring back the faith of the masses to the newly reformed government once lead by the uncorrupted officials. It might more than a lifetime before such hero lives, but just like what Honorable Chairperson Atienza said, “we must think in the long term”. We would like to add that the hero must be a symbol of the country as well. One of of the Chairpersons argued that Aguinaldo must be our national hero since our nation’s symbols, such as the flag and national anthem, were made because of him. We do not agree with this since he IS NOT the symbol itself. He only made the symbols, but he is not one.
DeleteWe personally think a national hero need not be dead. Being a hero does not always mean getting into a battle of guns and swords. The most important thing is having that sacrificial mindset.There are living national heroes. Being a hero means constantly influencing other people and remembered, Rizal and Bonifacio as such. Also, a hero is someone who acts against odds trying to uplift other people from their suffering.
In every fictional stories I’ve read, a hero is just what we call an average person, until one day that something would come up and make them special. But the case is that what is our definition of a hero not on the ideal side but in our reality or history.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever heard of a story about our national hero in the name of Jose Rizal, he’s story before he was born? This is what I’ve heard in my teacher in noli me tangere, that before rizal was born, when his mother was in a church in antipolo, they have heard cries of a baby but there is no baby in the church but there is only one person who is pregnant and that is her mother. And there is another story that when he was born he’s head is not in the normal size as you may tell in science that normal people without sickness that has a big brain are told to be smart or genius.
My point is that in reality and fiction there is this one thing that has been the same. We can say that they both have happen because of that they are destined. As you may find in the bible that God has chosen people who are destined to become a hero or a savior. As what we can find in the bible, the story of Moses and many others. And also the pagan turned catholic, Constantine I. I personally do not believe in the term destiny but there are people who are so the next paragraph would be my personal opinion.
Like Mr. De Villa said, we are the one who make the heroes special that we didn’t think that it is the normal duty of every citizen to care for his or her country. I believe that everyone can be a hero just by doing their duty for our country. We can become a hero just by our simple ways. As what we can see in the story of Efren Penaflorida and Carlos “Kesz” Valdez that they have become a hero in the eyes of those people they’ve help because of the simple thing that they’ve done. This may prove that we can also be a hero without this so called destiny. We can be our own ideal hero in this reality. This quote is what can summarize what I’ve written, “You must be the change you wish to see in the world” from Mahatma Gandhi.
-Joseph Cabanit 2POL2
Maragay, Dave
ReplyDeleteRegencia, Lyle
Tolentino, Mon
1. Standard for being a national hero
1.1 Arguements on having a national hero
1.1.1 Barcenas stated that Aguinaldo was the first to proclaimed Rizal as national hero before the American sponsored it.
1.1.2 According to Horcajo, Jose Rizal was proclaimed as the national hero because of his nationalistic writings.
1.1.3 Pangan asserts that having a national hero is having a symbolic characteristics that would result to unity.
1.1.4 Bisco adds that a hero should strengthen the identity of his/her countrymen.
1.1.5 Ramos stated that being a national hero, one should be a sacrifing icon resulted from a selfless death.
1.1.6 according to Gimao, having a national hero build a national identity.
1.2 Arguement that we doesnt need a national hero.
1.2.1 De villa argued that heroes just become a hero becuase they do something that should be done as a part of nation.
1.2.2 Maragay supported De villa that hero should not be treated specially.
1.3 Arguements on the Creteria for having a national hero
1.3.1 Cando adds that national heroes should have the creteria, hero should be dead.
1.3.2 Galvez stated that death is the highest form of nationalism.
1.3.3 Plopinio recall the debate from the technical committee for review.
1.3.4 Perez critcize that a national hero should be dead, supported by the arguement from Filipino blog, Efren Penaflorida is one of the decalared hero that is not dead
1.3.5 Regencia adds that death would ensure that the legacy of the hero would not be tarnished by future mistake.
1.3.6 Pormiento rejected the notion of national hero should be dead
1.3.7 Atienza adds that national hero should think for long term e.g filipinos that wanted to just push away spaniards doesnt think for long term.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBarcenas, Beryll Andre Y.
ReplyDeleteRamirez, Monica M.
1. Technical Committee on the National Hero
1.1 One that held series of meetings in order to define and deliberate the merits of the various definitions and criteria of a hero.
1.2 They adopted criteria in order to serve as basis for historical researchers in determining national to be proclaimed official.
1.2.1 Criteria of National Heroes
1.2.1.1 Heroes have a concept of nation and thereafter aspire and struggle for the nation’s freedom.
1.2.1.2Heroes are those who define and contribute to a system or life of freedom and order for a nation.
1.2.1.3Heroes are those who contribute to the quality of life and destiny of a nation.
1.2.2 Additional Criteria for Heroes
1.2.2.1 A hero is part of the people’s expression.
1.2.2.2 A hero thinks of the future, especially future generations.
1.2.2.3 The choice of a hero is purported to the entire process that made this particular person a hero.
2.0 Arguments in lined with the deliberation of Technical Committee of the National Hero
2.1 Arguments that support the criteria of national heroes presented by the Technical Committee
2.1.1 Pangan stated that heroes are those people who strengthen the sense of solid patriotism and nationalism in country.
2.1.2 Guimao emphasized heroes’ contribution in the quality of life as they build our national identity.
2.1.3 Inocentes asserted that heroes give its people a certain light in the midst of darkness in order to strive for freedom.
2.1.4 Galvez argued firmly that heroes serve as an inspiration to its people.
2.2 Arguments that go against the criteria of national heroes presented by Technical Committee
2.2.1 De Villa shows his displeasure in neither the need of the heroes nor the criteria of heroes as he believes that there is no special in sacrificing because its people obligation to defend its nation.
2.2.2 Maragay further explained that the standard of being national heroes must not only reside on those literatures since a nationalist act of a capable individual may vary.
3.0 Acknowledgment of the national heroes
3.1 The criteria adhered by the Technical Committee is reliable since they considered Rizal as not the only hero eligible to become the national hero.
3.2 As long as their aspiration was after its countries liberation and for the common good then they were qualified to become a national hero.
3.3 Lastly, national heroes are indeed special. According to Atienza, the way heroes think and act is unprecedented. They must be given formal recognition.
GALVEZ, JEAN CLAUDETTE L.
ReplyDelete2POL2
Throughout these years, the Philippines evolves so much in its history that it produces unforgettable events, questionable issues, and extraordinary individuals. Indeed, they have marked something in the lives of the Filipino people but to think of the significance of giving a considerate time on choosing and declaring a national hero or we must say national heroes should, therefore, one of the concerns in the study of the Philippine Nationalist Thought especially Political Science students like us.
What is a national hero? What must be his characteristics? Indeed, these are the questions that we should answer first so that we will be able to expound the discussion about this. Apparently, a technical committee was formed in the class of 2POL2 to deliberate such questions and issues about a national hero.
The appraisal was started by Horcajo, by stating several arguments, starting with that a national hero should awaken the Filipino people particularly their spirit into a revolution. She also mentioned that Rizal complied on this aspect that’s why she supports him being our national hero. Another member of the committee took part but just to remind the committee about the current date and that was Pormento. Moving on, Erese mentioned some characteristics of a national hero such as a person who loves his nation, making him a supporter of the necessity of a national hero in the country. In addition, characteristics of strong sense of nationalism and patriotism were brought up by Pangan. This was a remarkable statement on the argument of the said member supporting the previous speaker. Thus, another notable characteristic presented by the member of the committee, Ramos, was a national hero being a person who leads to serve. Service being the main point. Gimao proposed that a hero should be able to build a national identity and to contribute for the betterment of the quality of life of the Filipino citizens. Suddenly, the deliberation was intensified when Maragay opposed all the members who said that we need heroes. He proposed that we do not need heroes because of the reason that Rizal just provided us fallacies embodied on his ideals. Besides, all the Filipinos, now, didn’t witness his heroic acts, disregarding the works of Rizal.
Cando presented different criteria to counter propose the speaker ahead of her. A hero should be dead, patriotic and most importantly, a Filipino. Course of our history was the point of next one, Galvez, she mentioned that a national hero is a person who will continuously change our past, present and the future by inspiring the citizenry as well as the other people. She also said that because of these days’ challenges, we need one person who will, somehow, lead us and motivate us to change our society. Regencia holds up Cando’s argument that a hero must be dead because if he is still alive, the idea of a being a hero will be pointless and surely, unexpected happenings could happen that will just destroy his own identity as a national hero as well as a Filipino. Since, national hero is a title, it should be protected and justified. Inocentes added that a person who helped the people to attain freedom should be our national hero. Ninoy Aquino had fought for the freedom of the people and sacrificed his life, therefore, he should be considered as a national hero according to Emeterio. Summarizing the deliberation, Plopinio supported some of the arguments of those who said that we need national heroes. Another member, Corpuz, added that a national hero should be a calm-thinker and didn’t use violence on fighting for his countrymen like our current national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCONTINUATION
ReplyDeleteA person can be declared a national hero although he’s still alive was the statement brought up by Pormento. He believes that what is important is the hero should contribute to betterment of the society especially the individuals. And according to him, “Pambansang Kamao” Manny Pacquiao is a proof of this argument.
Finally, Atienza point that we should consider the things that can happen in the long term. Don’t just think of what we have now. Think about the future. She also dignified that a hero is a special person because he is the one who has the very guts to do the actions that, supposedly, the citizenry should do for its own nation.
Significant roles in the process of nation building and contributions to history are the main reasons why there were laws enacted and proclamations issued honoring national heroes. Indeed, the adopted criteria of the Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee were appropriate and acceptable. Actions speak louder than words but for me, before you can proceed to these two, ideas come first. I’m not saying that Rizal is the right one because he has good ideals but I just want to utter that unlike warriors, an idea cannot be killed. But of course, we are all warriors also in the battling of our minds. For me, the best is when a national hero is able to manage his thoughts, words and deeds accordingly and be able to embed this to the Filipino citizens. Another thing, besides being an inspiration, a national hero should also show the Filipino potential. He must show that there is no limit to the ability of the Filipino. Lastly, in my opinion, not only the national hero should have this but all of the Filipinos, that nationalism should always burn in the minds and hearts of each and every one of us so that despite of challenges we face, we will still continue to march on for our better future.
In addition to the arguments and apologies raised by the members of this honorable board, I want also to raise my own insights on the topic. In our present situation, there are a lot of people who are considered as heroes. Boxers who are proudly raising their flags after courageously winning a long fight, OFW’s who are working hard to earn money and those social workers who are doing charity works for free. These are the people that most of us today considered as heroes. Obviously they are different from Andres Bonifacio, Jose Rizal or Emilio Aguinaldo. This is a indication that the criteria of being a hero changes from time to time, that each of us has our own notion on what are the characteristics of a hero should be. Time changes, culture progresses and the standards of being a hero are also changing. In the present we are dictated by our norms on what should be the ideal standard of being a hero. This is based on our present situation today and how we view our past. My own criteria on who should be declared as a hero are different on the standards of a Filipino in the time of 19th or 20th century. What I am trying to point out is that our definition of heroism today, or any criterion approved by this honorable board are all provisional and are all subject for change.
ReplyDelete-Montesa, Albert Vincent B.
2POL2