philozhaiphy

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #1 TOPIC: Introduction to Philosophy Answers won’t exist and cannot be identified as the questions didn’t exist. There’s an answer as there’s a question which are the main reason why the research occurred.

According to Nancy Willard, questions is sometime more important than answers as answers seems a reward of searching and looking for a solution to a certain problem. It can also be considered as something that is same as a reward for seeking, as it is main drive because study is being conducted, and research exist. Also, in research paper, statement of the problem which are in a form of questions is an important part of the entire research, so with that, we can see its importance as it is a driving force.

Questions as well as answers are considered as an essential part of learning. We utter or listing questions to know what kind of information we needed, and then as we found the answers, another question will occur, and then the curiosity arises, and lead human to a great information they wished to acquire. It also disclosed that questions are more essential as it open a lot of doors of learning which are part of developing different skills, and as the answers have been found, the doors will close to open another opportunity which surely have a contribution also.

The questions may stimulate our thinking and then with that, we are eager to look for possible answers through our experiences and by doing research which are also beneficial in facing challenges. Questions can’t also be wrong the way answers does, as people can ask different questions based on what they wanted to know, but as long as they didn’t see the effective one, they will still look for it, and the cycle. A single problem is a good investment, as one question can produce multiple answers and produce more questions. Questioning and curiosity are the locomotives of exploration.

Although not all issues as well as answers are worth exploring, but for every dozen, there is a golden issue that puzzles us. This question brings us into an idea or answers that we have not yet explored. The golden question pierced through several circles at once. It takes some time before we find the problem, but once we find it, it will amaze us. Asking questions seems to stimulate creativity. It cultivates an open mind. The questions we ask lead us to in gaining new knowledge and insights. Questions drive us to find answers that we had never thought about before we asked them.

Since one cannot simply ask one question after another without considering the answer. This method appears insincere in questioning. It is the question that naturally leads to the consideration of the answer, which leads to more questions, which leads to more answers, which leads to more questions. The two move back and forth, like a lumberjack saw on an old oak tree, each time they move back and forth, they saw through the annual rings until they reached the core.

Socratic questioning forces us to face preconceived beliefs and cognitive biases. This process of questioning allows us to explore concepts that we often learn in childhood, as we knew that every child have a lot of questions and every time they can acquire answers, questions continually arise. Questions are essential than answers as it serve as a bridge which can lead the children to be someone who’s full of wisdom.

There are some familiar analogies which tell that the journey is more important than the destination as journey symbolize as questions then destination often alike as the destination. This concept become that embarking on the experiences along the way are way important than the destination itself as it will help and allow human to understand the path they are taking. This concept applies with thinking critically, as the question is the starting line, then the answers are the finish line wherein the achievement lies.

The questions are more essential as the answers depend on how it was formulated, and if the questions are bad, then the possible answers will be bad as well. If the questions are accurately created, then the answers will be suitable for it. Questions depend on a person, as if it is not good, then people must not expect a good response as well.

The question is more important than the answers as the study will still continue even the one who are studying cannot found an answer, and also because the question is sought, constructed and exposed, and the answer is at best as temporary response to a certain phenomenon. Its accuracy will change and constantly transfer and possibly decay over time, and with that, it requires to be transformed and rebuilt as the world itself changes and re-evaluate. Questions are always the beginning of the journey, and that ends as the answers has been found. It is essential that the questions are accurately formulated the way the person who asked wished to be answered. If the questions are just for fun, then why people are expecting a factual answer.

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #2 TOPIC: Philosophy of Language

I believe, it is impossible to have a world without a language. According to a famous quotation, “No man is an island” which indicates that no one is truly self-sufficient, and everyone must rely to other people. This means that it is impossible for a human being to live alone and became isolated because it is innate for humans to live with other people who they can relate and socialize with as this is important for the survival of humans. This is in connection on how it is impossible to have a world without language. Since it is natural for humans to live and rely with other people for survival, therefore, there is a need to communicate and interact as building human relationships are needed. So, if language will not exist in the world, there is a bigger chance that human beings will be confused on how they should communicate and express their thoughts and feelings. And as what I have mentioned, since it is innate for human beings to rely to other people, there is a need to communicate which can be done accordingly through the use of language which serves as an essential key in human survival.

When we say sentient beings, these are the people who perceive and respond depending in their senses such as sight, hearing, touch, taste, or smell. In relation with that, in my own view, it is possible for sentient beings to exist in a world without language for a short time only considering it may be effective in some situations. However, since survival is important for humans, it is important to have a system for a long term so in situations where we need to communicate complexity as how the process of communication really provides human, it will be impossible. Examples of these situations are communication that seeks feedbacks and exchanges of thoughts and ideas which will help humans to communicate in a deeper and complex level. Also, if sentient beings will exist in a world without language, it may cause conflicts. As senses are their only way to convey things, there will be confusions. As what I can see, a world without language for sentient beings will be a one-sided communication or maybe, not communication at all so in the end, it is still impossible for sentient beings to exist in a world without language.

In my own view, without considering the audience meaning that refers on how your listener will conceive your ideas, you will just focus on speaker meaning or the meaning that you have in your own message in transmitting your ideas. With this, it is undeniable how it is easy to transmit ideas the way we understand it for a reason that we only speak relying on our own minds only and without the consideration of anyone’s understanding and how they will conceive your own words.

As what I have mentioned, there are speaker meaning where the speaker uses words he intended and then, the audience meaning means how the audience understand or conceive the listener’s ideas and words. So, if asked if people can completely understand us the way we intend to be understood, considering that this falls with the consideration of the audience meaning, therefore, it is impossible for people to understand the listener the way he intend to be understood. This is because the comprehension of his message wills depends on how the audience will understand and conceive his words. For instance, if Mr. A and Mr. B are both asked to define “love”, Mr. A answered that “Love is devoting their selves for their family.” while Mr. B answered that “Love is caring himself.”. As what you will observe, their definitions about “love” are different as they have conceived the word “love” differently which are because of their differences in observations and experiences. Indeed, language can’t refer directly to an internal state. Instead, it can only refer to the aspect of it that is publicly observable by other people.

Based on my own knowledge, a cat in a hat refers to a pet who received so much love and care by his owners and as a way to show their love and care to their cat, owners dressed up their cat in a hat for a photo opportunity. More than just to show their love and care to their cat, dressing him up for a photo opportunity also means a memory that they wanted to cherish and remember.

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #3 TOPIC: Epistemology The word certain is being free from doubt and reservation or knowing exactly that something is true, or known to be true, destined, correct, exact, confident, sure, or sure to happen. It also means that something is fixed or settled. Personally, the things that I am completely certain are life has an origin and ending, change and that I exist. Moore contended that “a thing can’t be certain unless it is known.” It is that fact that distinguishes the concepts of certainty and truth: “A thing that nobody knows may quite well be true but cannot possibly be certain.” Moore concluded that a necessary condition for the truth of “It is certain that p” is that somebody should know that p. Moore is therefore among the philosophers who answer in the negative the question of whether it is possible for p to be certain without being known. Life has an origin, and I am certain about it. There’s a lot of known theories about it and which one is true among those is what I am not certain but the fact that life has a beginning is what I and mostly everyone is certain. I am a rationalist after all. I bet to argue that there is a reason how we get to this or how life was formed. I am certain that there is an ending. Death of anything is a form of ending. Most of us saw it with our bare eyes, the ending of the life of our family or loved ones. Ending is certain for many things like the end of a movie, book, song and many more. Change is the only constant thing in the world and that is certain. Even governments change currencies, body change, we get wrinkled. We all change, things change, it’s a given .Everything else in life is a variable that we can do our best to plan for but always be aware of the degree of uncertainty that exists. . Plenty of things I might be certain right now might change depends upon the new knowledge and experiences. I believe with Rene Descartes “I think, therefore I am”. The fact that we are thinking proves so much that we exist because it will be impossible that we think if we do not exist at all. Even if we are to think we are in a simulation or dream there is still a mind and brain that’s behind the process of thinking. Descartes eventually discovers that “I exist” is impossible to doubt and is, therefore, absolutely certain.

In philosophy, infallibilism or sometimes called "epistemic infallibilism is the view that knowing the truth of a proposition is incompatible with there being any possibility that the proposition could be false. Infallible truths can be easily notice than we can imagine. With the reasons, experiences, and justification we hold about something it can be an infallible truth in our own perception. There are things to consider to be certain that it has a potential to be an infallible truth. According to research, Infallibilism should not be confused with the universally accepted view that a proposition P must be true in order for someone to know that P. Instead, the infallibilist holds that a person who knows P could not have all of the same evidence or justification that one currently has if P were false, and therefore that one's evidence or justification offers a guarantee of the truth of P. Thus, in cases where a person could have held the same true belief P with the same level of evidence or justification and still been wrong, the infallibilist holds that the person does not know P. The infallibilist defines knowledge in the following way: A person (henceforth S) knows that a proposition (henceforth P) is true if and only if; P is true, S believes that P is true, S is justified in their belief that P is true, S's justification guarantees the truth of P. According to the infallibilist, fallible beliefs may be rationally justified, but they do not rise to the level of knowledge unless their truth is absolutely certain given one's evidence. The contrary view to infallibilism, known as fallibilism, is the position that a justified true belief may be considered knowledge even if one's evidence does not guarantee its truth, or even if one can rationally doubt it given one's current evidence.

I am completely certain about my name. It is written on my birth certificate and a lot of witnesses and users of my name make it undoubtedly certain. I am certain that my name is the most important and unique identity I possess since birth, and it will be hard for me to see it untrue for I have been using and living with it for two decades. Something about myself that I wish to be true is that I am a person with satisfying self-esteem. Self-Esteem is the term most often confused with self-confidence while it is the one perhaps least similar to it. Self-esteem refers to a belief in your overall worth. Broad statements like “I’m a good person” fall into this category. Self-esteem is one of the levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and improvements to self-confidence can contribute to your broader self-esteem. To achieve this wishful thinking of mine. Here are five ways to nourish your self-esteem when it is low; first, use positive affirmations correctly. Positive affirmations such as “I am going to be a great success!” Second, identify your competencies and develop them. Self-esteem is built by demonstrating real ability and achievement in areas of our lives that matter to us. If you pride yourself on being a good cook, throw more dinner parties. Third, learn to accept compliments. Set yourself the goal to tolerate compliments when you receive them, even if they make you uncomfortable. Fourth, eliminate self-criticism and introduce self-compassion. Doing so will avoid damaging your self-esteem further with critical thoughts and help build it up instead. Fifth, affirm your real worth. The bottom line is improving self-esteem requires a bit of work, as it involves developing and maintaining healthier emotional habits but doing so, and especially doing so correctly, will provide a great emotional and psychological return on your investment. I have to be always on a positive light. I have to convince myself that I have something to be proud of to be able to be confident on my own reflection and in the eyes of those I love. I have to discover, enhance and emphasize the strengths that I possess in order to have some roots of my booming confidence and self-esteem.

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #4 TOPIC: Philosophy of Science I believe that society should irrevocably submit itself to science because it serves as the dominant channel of knowledge which is necessary for communication throughout the world. Through science, we can improve our education, enhance the globalization tools and economical tools for achieving quality life. Additionally, science responds to the needs of society in terms of societal needs and global changes. There is a need to submit itself because we cannot be fully aware of the essential criteria of science. Believingly, there would be no human growth and development and insufficient knowledge will continue if society doesn't submit itself to science.

In the other way, science is a knowledge that without an investment, the world would be just a constant world without changes and improvements. Merely without science society would be stagnant to immemorial adversaries. In short, science and society are inseparable because science provides and generates solutions to everyday life and helps to give answers to the hidden mysteries of the world. In fact, it has essential functions in society that shouldn't be taken away.

For me, the best demarcation criterion is the clarity or ambiguous wording. I wanted to cascade this criterion since not even philosophers have confusion on this criterion. Many people get confused because ambiguity is a sort of regimentation of natural language in formal logic. Understandably, there are different technical terms for professional fields. But what I cannot grasp is that most of the people want a simple answer without knowing that the given question is not even simple. For instance, there is always a confusion with the words real, fact, and truth. In philosophy, when we say real, it is something that is perceivable: in short this is based on existence and experience. Next is the word fact, people confuse the word fact between truth. In philosophical definition, it means the description of something real. E.g., The fire is hot. By that word, it implies that the fire is really hot constantly. While truth is something that derives from fact and reality. Conversely, truth derives from investigation, verification, and justification. In connection to the criterion of ambiguity, in any field of science, any aspects of life, we must observe clarity of conversation, in simple manner that we prevent using perplexing words to avoid confusion. We must avoid foggy questions to avoid foggy answers too.

According to the empiricist view, science is a powerful enterprise, but it cannot tell us everything about reality. Why? To do science, the scientist must be pre-supposed to follow: 1.) The uniformity of nature - Science presupposed a law which governed the universe. 2.) The intelligibility of the universe- Science presupposed the universe to be understood. 3.) The reliability of the senses – Science presupposed those senses are reliable. 4.) The laws of thoughts – Science presupposed different laws. 5.) Lastly, the law of causality – Science presupposed that every effect has a cause.

Having stated that, I think constructive empiricism is the best definition of science. It is semantically literal aiming to provide adequate empirical evidence. The process of obtaining accurate knowledge is one of the important processes of science. And yes, I strongly believe that Science cannot be possible without learning it from observations and perception. Empiricism came from the word ‘’empirical’’ which means scientific knowledge comes from verification and/or verifiable observation rather than pure logic or theory. One example is the crime scene, you cannot just accuse a person that he or she kills the victim without performing investigation. In the same way of using your critical observation and verification based on justifiable situations. I doubt if we tackle the word ‘’science’’. Science is broad. Therefore, there are different types and branches of it to clarify and resolve things as to specific branches of science we have. In connection with the empiricist view, science cannot provide the reality - but the latter will provide truth. Apparently, there is a mere difference between reality and truth. Reality is based on what we just experience or seeing the nature of existence, conversely, truth comes from the fact that has been verified, experimented and investigated.

When we most think of models, we either think of Kendall Jenner, Gigi Hadid, and Crissy Teigen or different versions of things that exist in reality made out of plastic. Kidding aside, science models are the models that are being used by scientists to help society perceive the world. They could be made through a mathematical way of representing the world in some way, perhaps it is a climate, population of crustacean or an ecosystem of various species. And these all exist because of mathematical models- a science model.

Let’s now think about a video game where in the virtual game is like a world involving a process of ocean current system: sorts of games in the virtual world as relates to the process that we are interested in and essentially play those games then test different laws of scenario and see what the outcome is going to be. And just like video games, it was like an exact reality of a mathematical model exactly like the real world that is employed by the scientist to perceive what exactly the real world is. But because of key aspects of the real world, models are indubitably crucial to the scientist. Some models are used for other few important things: 1.) Building intuition- when we sometimes quickly want to discover how a couple of things fit together. 2.) Making connections- it is useful in the filling process where you probably have different observations from left to right of what's going on in between. 3. ) Predictions- this the time and place that would possibly see the future and possible outcome of the inventions. Science models can view intuition about how complex the natural process is as it works. Usually that means the start of information. Information permeates all aspects of the world to provide new better ideas, quicker communication and to immensely learn better technology models for quality life. Another way is measuring the ocean current. Have you ever thought how it would become possible to measure the ocean currents without a science model? Scientists do a thorough investigation, study, observation and experiments to know the conditions and possible harm that could arise when they execute one specific discovery. They have to know whether the ocean current is in the middle part of the ocean, highest part, or in the huge part. Complicated if we think but that is how science models works. They have to know what the temperature is, is the wind calm, very calm or no wind at all. So, in perceiving the real world, they have to be aware of this process. There is always a need to run the science model and see what we can get.

Science models literally, physically, mathematically, and conceptually represents a system of ideas, events, and/or processes. It is used in routinely explaining scientific concepts. However, some people are unaware of its true purpose and functions. Science model allows you to run things in a civilized world. Alternative kind of reality, mimicking the reality of the system of the study but you are actually able to test all of those at once. And that was extremely powerful! Imagine how science models can greatly benefit society to see the real world behind. Succeeding, science models make a connection among philosophy, politics, medical technology, etc. This is giving the world an extra as it will discover different laws of physics, electricity, politics, technology, principles, and nature of metaphysics and so on. Just imagine if we cannot put our feet on the ground and things are falling around. If that is our case now, precisely we do not have mass and gravity. But how do we discover this? It is all because of science models.

In relevance to the question, how science models perceive the world, technically, it is a sort of process- formulate a hypothesis, run the experiment through hypothesis, verification, and forming theory. These hypotheses are sometimes impossible to run, but through a science model, it would be possible as it understands or perceives how the world works. However, there are some limitations in the science model such as monitoring the virus experiment physically everyday- not to harm the people and the world. On most occasions, experiments of the science model will take days, months or even years to have a finite answer but this will surely be the closest approximation to the truth since it resulted from experiments and verification. Scientific models are always modifiable to see how the world really works. But the good thing here is that it is always possible to continue refining, getting closer and closer to the simulation of reality of the world. With the right use of models, it can visualize the phenomena in the world. Not just that but also it can be beneficial in solving problems that rest at the rear of the world.

[philozhaiphy]

LPHILO BLOG ENTRY #5 TOPIC: LOGIC (Love is a Fallacy) 1.Are you able to evade fallacies? Can we connect to other people without subscribing to extra-logistic arguments?

Effective persuasion does not require deception. For example, consider an emotional appeal. The fallacy here is to ignore the reasons and evidence that support emotions. Emotions are very convincing and should be used, but not at the expense of reason and evidence. By connecting emotionally with people, you can persuade them to donate to a valuable charity. No error is necessary. Errors hinder the open and mutual opportunity to exchange ideas needed for meaningful discussions. Rather, these errors distract the reader with an overload of rhetorical appeal rather than a thorough discussion. You can use logical mistakes in both written and verbal communication.

2. Is it possible for us as humans not to commit fallacies?

It`s additionally human nature to have biases and hypocrisy is every other factor that'll take place in some unspecified time in the future for your lifestyles irrespective of how a lot you try and keep away from it. Fallacies are surely part of something that includes manipulating perception. Marketing as an instance makes use of pretty a piece of misdirection and May downright prey on human beings’ insecurities really to persuade them, they want something they honestly don't. In brief human beings are incorrect and fallible so you are certain to slide up from time to time and there are situations that could make it much more likely than others. That's why it is essential to be aware about your fallibility and to do your pleasant to seize yourself and others whilst some thing's off with the arguments.

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #6

TOPIC: Philosophy of Ethics Regarding the answers I gathered from three members of my family, my general observation is that they are not ready yet to adapt to the changes we need to do with our ethical beliefs in life in this 21st century. My mother’s perception is revolving around the religious perspective. While with my father and cousin, it is a combination of religious and historical views. After presenting them the counterpoints, my mother is firmly standing with her opinions. And there are slight changes in my brother and sister’s opinions wherein they do not care if others will be supporting these concepts but for themselves, they are still against it.

From my own perspective regarding this matter, generally, my stands reflect my own virtue of valuing one’s living depending on their own ways. Personally, I have not yet experienced or been involved in the first three topics such as abortion, same-sex marriage, and euthanasia, but I have firm beliefs about these things. On the topic of the political climate in our country, I can see that our government is not yet stable in providing us with our basic needs. Given that, their pandemic responses are failures compared to what we should have done in order to ensure the safety of everyone, mitigating the transmission and encouraging every Filipino to be vaccinated. The people are my concern, not the politicians who are having privileged lives while their constituents are facing challenges in all aspects.

For the first topic which is abortion, my stand is based on a case-to-case basis. Like for example, if a woman just wanted to abort her offspring intentionally without any moral conscience and randomly doing it, I will be against it since it is like murdering your own child. But, for the cases of rape victims who got pregnant by their abusers, women without any financial capacity to be pregnant, and having medical conditions that can worsen their health or worst die because of having a baby, I will see their decision for abortion without any judgment. In the case of same-sex marriage, even though I myself is not a member of LGBTQA+, I can say that I am an ally to them because I fully support this one. This is for the members who just wanted to receive the same rights as straight people do. And as long as they are not doing anything bad towards anyone, who are we to stop them from living their lives.

On the topic of euthanasia, this also depends on a case-to-case basis situation wherein if there is consent from the person undergoing it, I will be supporting this one because we cannot continue their agony and pain if they really cannot take it anymore. I will just be against it, if there is no consent from the patient the family is doing it purposely to murder that person. Lastly, regarding the political climate here in the Philippines, I can say that most Filipino politicians are just seeing politics as only a game wherein they wanted to gain the power to control people. But, be reminded that leadership is not about garnering followers to control, but instead making the people trust you because you will be the one allotting projects from the taxes they pay to the government. And so far, I am not satisfied with everything that is happening in how the current administration used the money of the people from various projects. Focusing on improving the healthcare system, education, addressing poverty are the things that the government must be doing. All I can see are new buildings and roads which only satisfy the foreign investors in the country and not the constituents themselves.

As you can see my general principle in my stands are about the people and not about religion, history or even other people is influencing me just like the stands of my family members. I can say that the generation I belong to today is observant of everything that is happening around us and understanding the various matters, so there is really a high possibility that the new generations will have empowered perspectives compared to the earlier ones. Provided that, the principle I consider as most premium with is the value of life in the sense of allowing everyone to live up to their ways as long as there is no harm given to you and your freedom is not being violated.

And I believe that this principle of mine follows the ethical perspective of deontology wherein I support the idea that assessing the goodness of the actions must not be in relation to its outcomes but on the responsibility and duty that every person must be following. I firmly stand that we should not be weighing in our actions based on the consequences because it seems that we are only doing the good actions because we are after the rewards. For example, if we believe in God, we will be going to heaven afterlife. So other people only believe in God not because they really believe that God is existing but because they wanted to go to Heaven. And this kind of perspective is dangerous because when there are no longer good outcomes, we will be choosing to do bad things. In short, it says that our goodness is not innate or within us. But for me, since I observed as well that children are naturally good except if you influence their bad actions, then I can say we are all naturally good and we know deep in our hearts our responsibility to be good because we care about others, not until someone told us to not to or make us feel that we must not be good.

And, of course, there are also cons with this deontology concept such as first, there are disagreements with the principles inclined in the decision-making, meaning there also other factors on deciding to be good. Just like the example, I provided wherein others may influence our idea of goodness. But for me, the conscience exists because it is a reminder for us whenever we are deciding something. It makes you feel what is right because again naturally we are all good when we are born. Second, there are times we follow the good but bad consequences are the ones we receive. For me, there are situations wherein we know we do the right thing, but still bad things are being reciprocated. With this, other factors may be involved such as sabotaging your feelings and actions by others, and maybe God is allowing you to feel the challenges in life so that it can make you a better person. Lastly, the conflict wherein all of us may think different duties we need to follow. It is a problem because not all duties are good and not all responsible are having responsibilities that are for good causes. But I also think that various people have different duties since we have not had the same set-ups of lives but bear in mind that despite having different duties, there should only be one goal and that is to be good. At the end of the day, there is no perfect theory, but it depends on us on how to assess and apply it in life.

[philozhaiphy]

PHILO BLOG ENTRY #7 ASKING A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION... As we all know, our government system is now in turmoil because of people who are part of the said system itself. And we cannot deny the fact that even though we are under a democratic form of governance, there are still a lot of issues that needed to be resolved but in fact, are being covered with lies of different politicians who are been trusted by many Filipinos. In this, we cannot put the blame on the people because of the simple reason that they are the ones who put those people to the Malacañang palace or Senate because in the first place they have not been properly informed of what should be the right thing to do and what are really the prospects of those whom they see as heroes but the reality is killers of their dreams for having a peaceful, economically and educationally arising country. That is why in this situation we could really see that the idea of democracy is only for those who are in the upper-class system of the social hierarchy that we have right now.

Even though for us commoners who just enjoy the little things that life offers and consider this as democracy already, it is not morally right to let us be blinded from the other important rights that we should be having. Actually, it is their work the people who have heavenly lives in the government to guide us to think what more we could have as a Filipino and be with us to every action that we should be all doing toward the overall growth of the citizens of our country. But that is not happening. And it will not be happening if we continue to let them cover us from the bitter truths of our society. That is why it is really important indeed to tackle with the people of the nation especially the students so they should know the purpose of their learning to our nation, about how we can develop more of our current state. And most importantly, how we could give voices to the marginalized people and stop the oppressors from giving dirt to our identity as a nation of the Philippines.

Here is one of the philosophical perceptions of democracy which is Derrida’s Democracy to Come. But even though we have not mentioned nor learned it in our class, I was fascinated by its concepts now it sees the concept on how to develop democracy. Upon researching about it, honestly, it was not still one hundred percent clear to me but what I have understood is that the process of self-preserving and self-defense of the idea of democracy is also a way of destructing itself. And since it was compared to the work of antibodies in our body as autoimmune substances, it suggests that democracy as being autoimmune is also threatening itself by its very own logic. So, in this, I could say that my idea of having a misconception of democracy nowadays is somehow related to this in a way that people are valuing so much of their own democracy but they did not know that the way on how they perceive with preserving it which is settling for less is also their way of destructing it since they are letting themselves to be trap in the imposed idea of democracy of the elites to them. And that is how hard to understand what processes must have in order to develop our democracy this time where we are on the verge of hell-like lives. Well, what important thing to do first this time is, to let the people realize that we are not in the right state of governance, be socially aware always, and of course never be quiet until there are still oppressed citizens of the Philippine nation. O bayan ‘kong Pilipinas, Ika’y aming ililigtas!