For almost four centuries, the Philippines was colonized and occupied by three separate countries on three separate occasions, one after the other. This scale of colonialism has left its mark on Filipino culture, values, and identity in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, the Spanish and their brought Christianity has ingrained a sense of kapwa in the hearts and minds of the Filipinos which has consequently become one of the cornerstones of the Filipino virtues. However, on the negative side, they have also brought with them their practices such as corruption and crab mentality that have had lasting effects on Filipino society. These effects of colonialism has shaped the Filipino identity and part of it has become the basis of what is known as the Filipino virtue ethics.
In Alfred Adler’s theory, he identified striving for superiority and success as the main driving force behind people’s behavior (Feist and Feist, 2008). Furthermore, he cites social interest as the sole measurement of human values (Feist et al., 2008). Adler’s identification of one single drive for behavior and the importance he placed on social interest can best explain the Filipino identity. However, before delving into the parallels between Adlerian theory and the facets of Filipino personality, it is best to first define two aspects of the latter that will be the main focus of the comparisons, namely: Filipino Virtue Ethics and Crab Mentality.
Filipino virtue ethics is a system of virtues based on loob and kapwa with pagkakaisa as its telos or goal. Rather than their literal translations, loob refer to a person’s relational will or how he treats his kapwa while kapwa refers to a shared self or a union of “I-and-the-other”. Pagkakaisa, on the otherhand, means oneness with others. These three combined give rise to virtues such as kagandahang-loob, utang-na-loob, pakikiramdam, hiya, and lakas-ng-loob/bahala-na which are all important in Filipino society (Reyes, 2015). Meanwhile, crab mentality or crabs in the barrel syndrome was described by Miller (2019) as an act wherein people who socially identify with one another and who are striving for success sabotage each other rather than support each person’s strive for success. Now that these have been defined, it is now time to apply Adler’s theory to the Filipino personality.
For Adler, everyone is born with inferiorities which motivate people to try and achieve things. However, depending on the balance of the psyche, a person can either become confident or develop an inferiority complex which in turn produces a two different outcomes (Collin, Ginsburg, Weeks, Layzan, Benson, Grand, 2012). This is Adler’s first tenet which states that the one driving force behind people’s behavior is striving for success and superiority (Feist et al., 2008). Applying this to the Filipino personality, striving for success as a driving force can be seen in actions guided by the Filipino virtue ethics while striving for superiority can be seen in actions, such as crab mentality, that go against virtue ethics.
Striving for success as the driving force of actions guided by the Filipino virtue ethics can be seen in the application of each virtue since they all aim to sustain the oneness of society. Among the virtues, the best example would be the application of the virtue of Kagandahang-Loob. Kagandahang-loob is described as the “affective concern for others and the willingness to help them in times of need” (Reyes, 2015). What makes kagandahang-loob different from other forms of altruism or acts of kindness is that it that the person on the receiving end is usually treated like family (Reyes, 2015). To illustrate, a scenario where a doctor waives the fees of their patient who cannot afford it but is in dire need of their services, given that their intentions is done from the heart, is an example of kagandahang-loob. In the code of ethics of the Philippine Medical Association, it is written that doctors should waive the fees of colleagues and family members when providing essential and evidence based medical care (Philippine Medical Association, 2016), and therefore by waiving the fees of the patient in the scenario, they are also being treated like family or kin, making it an act of kagandahang-loob. This example exhibits striving for success as its driving force because it is done with the intention of helping the community and, thus, moving society forward.
Meanwhile, striving for superiority as the driving force of actions that go against virtue ethics can be seen in crab mentality. As stated previously, crab mentality is the act wherein people sabotage one another rather than supporting each other’s goal of achievement (Miller, 2019). This can be seen as an act with striving for personal superiority as the driving force because like crabs in a barrel, individuals who possess crab mentality pull other people down once they see that person surpass their achievements in an attempt to hold on to their superiority. Since they do not want other people to be above them, this can be seen to be done by people with an inferiority complex who want to feel superior over others. A more concrete example of this would be smart shaming or anti-intellectualism that is very common in the Philippines. Smart shaming is the act of shaming people who try and share their knowledge with others, especially when it comes to topics such as politics or world news due to the hostility and mistrust of intellectual pursuits (Sison, 2015). Smart shaming is result of the use of anti-intellectualism by dictators to establish themselves and to frame educated people as the enemy because they challenge societal norms and the dictator’s regime (Sison, 2015). This shows that smart shaming is an act done and produced with striving for personal superiority as the main drive since it is a result of feeling threatened or inferior to those who challenge them.
Moving forward, the fourth tenet of Adler’s theory involves social interest which is derived from the German term Gemeinschaftsgefühl that can loosely be translated to “a feeling of oneness with all humanity” (Feist et al., 2008). This is similar to the Filipino word pagkakaisa which means oneness (Reyes, 2015). Aside from their similar meaning, both terms are also said to be the measure of human values. In Adler’s theory, people who lack Gemeinschaftsgefühl fail to strive for the success for all people while in Filipino virtue ethics, those who do not put pagkakaisa as their final goal fail to embody the said virtues. Moreover, social interest and charity or selflessness are said to not be synonymous as acts of philanthropy may not be motivated by Gemeinschaftsgefühl (Feist et al., 2008). Applying this to Filipino virtue ethics, the example made earlier on kagandahang-loob can be used. If a doctor or a lawyer who practices their profession for free is motivated with goals of being famous or being known in the community for what they did rather than wanting to help others because they feel a oneness with them, then they lack Gemeinschaftsgefühl and in turn they are not guided by the virtue ethics so they fail to put pagkakaisa as their final goal. Here it can be seen that Gemeinschaftsgefühl and pagkakaisa have a direct relationship with each other since the absence of one means the absence of the other.
In summary, Adler’s theory on personality can best explain the Filipino personality or pagkataong Pilipino because of concepts in both that coincide with one another. In particular, Alder’s first tenet on striving for success or superiority as the one driving force behind behavior can explain the motivations behind actions that are guided by the Filipino virtue ethics and those that are not. Acts guided by Filipino virtue ethics are driven by the success for the community while those that are not are driven by the goal of gaining personal superiority. In addition, because of their similarities in definition and how they function, Gemeinschaftsgefühl or social interest and pagkakaisa can be said to be two halves of one concept.
