www.soriano-ph.com

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 3 August 2008 Issue

It is safe to assume that Filipinos, as a people, are among the ‘easily pleased’, as compared to the other nationalities of the world. This notwithstanding, they also get hurt very easily, very onion-skinned in a manner of speaking. Little things make Filipinos in general happy but even the slightest incident could also trigger their disappointments.

Thus, a typical Filipino would always have something to complain about. More likely, however, he will keep the matter to himself than openly express, confront or even directly settle his gripes.  A Filipino would rather open his heart to, and seek comfort from, people who are close and dear to him even if they do not have any stake in his concerns. Many times, complaints are settled, or even exacerbate, through the grape vine in the chain of gossips and rumors.

Nevertheless, Filipinos love to communicate and express themselves. The Philippines would not be the text capital of the world if it were otherwise. Filipinos are everywhere in the digital divide with their blogs. Internet social networks like ‘friendster’ in fact are dominated by Filipinos. Filipino passion for music as a form of human expression is simply amazing.

While Filipinos are generally expressive, it is wonder why they would rather endure for as long as they can perhaps up to boiling point, than break the status quo. Make no mistake about it but the average Filipino has the heart for change, and would always hope for it, but he will never stake his person on it, especially if it would put his immediate family in jeopardy. He would rather suffer and protest in silence in this case until the clamor for reform or change has put the bandwagon in locomotion, that is when the battle lines are drawn.

Filipinos would openly express their love for their country but judging from how they live their daily lives as citizens, it is a source of wonder whether in fact they do. What should have been good for the country more often than not has to take a back seat in favor of convenience and parochial personal satisfaction. Choosing between what is good for the country and what is good for his very own or even his family’s interests (a usual line to justify his actions), a typical Filipino would obviously take the latter.   

A typical Filipino would have big dreams, high ambitions and would love to idolize and look up at a role model in pursuing his direction. What is disturbing these days is the impatience of many Filipinos to embrace the dignity of labor and hard work to ensure their economic success. Many are easily lured to professions, false opportunities, and even criminal endeavors that offer a quick fix. No wonder that when times are hard, there are more Filipinos lining up lotto betting stations, the illegal number game of jueting continues to flourish, there are incidence of corruption both in the public and private sector, the news never get tired of reporting people being duped of investment and money scams, and many young people abandon their dreams in favor of the career fad of the times. Nowadays, the only perceived measure of true success is money, and more money. Of course, this country is not alone in today’s highly materialistic environment.

Filipinos are generally reactive than proactive. They do not anticipate, or maybe refuse to aniticpate, difficulties and problems before they arise.  And when things go wrong, finger pointing starts, there would always be somebody to blame, and seldom would someone actually take responsibility for the mess.

In good or bad times, what is striking about Filipinos is their ingrained nature of finding joy in simple things and putting humor even to the most catastrophic situation. A Filipino is usually affective and easily shed tears while at the same time laugh at the situation without being necessarily happy about it.

There is no mutual exclusivity in the psyche of the Filipino. Anything goes so to speak. Whether this is good or bad could be seen where this country is, right now.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale’, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Times) – 20 January 2008 Issue

Her father died in 2004. Then, the production of her true crime television series was beset with much difficulty. Her accountant told her that with the expected losses she would go broke in a month’s time and may not be able to complete the two films which she was set to produce.

She would then receive calls one after another from friends and her production team expressing how much her relationship with them suffered because of her need to cope up with all her predicaments. To top it all, her mother seemed to have lost all her appetite to live without her father. And the thought of losing her mother at that time was unbearable.

All these left her deeply depressed and she knew that her life was slowly falling apart.

One day, her daughter gave her a photocopy of a 1910 book written by Wallace Wattles entitled “The Science of Getting Rich” and urged her to read it.

She was intrigued with the prescription of Wattles in his book that people could shape their thoughts and use the law of attraction to turn their lives around. Like a magnet, bad thoughts create bad situations as good thoughts create prosperity.

She then spent two and a half weeks tracing the roots of Wattles’ idea and discovered that it is an ancient old wisdom. She said that the law of attraction ‘lit a fire in her’.
 
She decided to make a television show about it and went to the United States to interview more than fifty teachers and philosophers who shared the same view on the power of thoughts and visualization – the law of attraction.

In 2006, a film entitled “The Secret” distributed widely through DVD and on line through video streaming consisting of series of interviews and dramatizations related to the law of attraction gained global attention. A book with the same title was subsequently published and became a best seller.

More than two million DVDs were sold in a year and four million books were sold in less than six months following its publication. Prominent media personalities like Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres, and Larry King were attracted to her thoughts.

Although she had her own share of public criticism and even a suit for copyright infringement, Australian television writer and producer, Rhonda Byrne, was listed as among Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People of the World in 2007.

What the mind can do to change individual perspective is known to humanity ages ago. It is not exactly a secret but rather an open book.

The power of the mind has been put in various contexts from science to religion, from psychology to medicine, from philosophy to economics.

Austrian physician Franz Mesmer, who gave the world the term “mesmerize”, pioneered the study of the subconscious mind and hypnosis in mental healing as early as the eighteenth century. In the early twentieth century, the human mind was already portrayed as a panacea, from pain relief to debt relief by self-help authors like Wattles and Norman Vincent Peale. What Byrne prescribes is really nothing new or a secret in the real sense.

Unfortunately, the power of the human mind is not self-fulfilling because the heart normally tempers it with all the emotional trashes as if the heart was put above the brain in the scheme of the human structure. And almost always, it is more difficult to stop the heart from being affective than to dictate the mind to think properly.

One must believe however that the power of the mind works because it surely does. And Byrne and all those who gained from this mindset would surely agree.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) – 30 September 2007 Issue

“There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind”, wrote American novelist and playwright, Joseph Heller, in his historical fiction book entitled “Catch-22” published in 1961. 

The book relates the story of a US bomber crew characterized by Captain Joseph Yossarian stationed in the Mediterranean island of Pianosa during the late stages of World War II.

BBC News reported that the book, which already sold more than ten million copies, is one of the significant novels of the 20th century. 

In his book, Heller described that Yossarian sought to be excused from flying suicidal mission. To do so, he must submit an official diagnosis from the flight surgeon that he is unfit due to insanity. But according to army regulations, any sane person would naturally refuse to fly dangerous combat missions. Therefore, by seeking to be excused on grounds of insanity meant that the bomber crew is in fact sane and is fit to fly. But those who willingly accept the mission implicitly demonstrate unfitness because of insanity and should be excused from flying without the need for a medical diagnosis.

In another setting, Yossarian offered marriage to a woman who felt distraught because no man would ever marry a woman like her who is no longer a virgin.  The woman rejected the offer claiming he is crazy for wanting to marry a non-virgin.
 
Both scenes satirically show that sanity is a prerequisite to recognize one’s own insanity.

Catch-22 depicts a paradox in a law, regulation or practice in which one is a victim regardless of the option taken because of a circular dilemma or a self-defeating logic. It creates a situation in which an action has consequences which make it impossible to pursue that action because it puts the person in a double bind or in a ‘chicken and egg situation’.

There’s always a ‘catch’ in day-to-day life. And that’s a practical reality that is difficult to escape from. A person cannot get a job without work experience but cannot get work experience without a job. An author cannot publish his work without an agent but cannot get an agent until his work is published. Schools portray a vital role in students’ reformation and learning and yet would shun students away when they obtain failing grades or commit some delinquencies.

But when Catch-22 widely afflicts public governance, society stinks.

It is axiomatic that corruption is one of the major causes of poverty, yet poverty is also an important element to keep corruption alive. As Manila Times senior reporter Annie Ruth C. Sabangan said in her January 6, 2004 special report: “Corruption became even more ingrained. Every administration’s effort to cure the disease appeared to be just a part of a vicious circle. Worse, the public perception lingers that the ones offering solutions are in fact part of the corruption problem.”

What is paradoxical, tragic or perhaps satirical in the Philippine setting is to see the same chameleons simply switching roles and standing either as accusers or the accused, the oppressor or the victim, depending on the prevailing political scene or social climate.

In one interview, Heller summed up his intentions in writing the novel in this wise: “everyone in my book accuses everyone else of being crazy. Frankly, I think the whole society is nuts – and the question is: What does a sane man do in an insane society?”

In the final chapters of Heller’s book, he said: “anything can be done to you that you can not prevent,” and so the only solution is to entirely break out of the system. Thus, Heller’s hero deserted and fled to Sweden.

No wonder millions of Filipino have opted to leave the country out of dismay.  Unfortunately, the Filipino who would lead the country out of Catch-22 is yet to be heard.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 29 April 2007 Issue

Sometime in 350 B.C., Greek philosopher Aristotle said in his work ‘Nicomachean Ethics’ that happiness “is a first principle; for it is for the sake of this that we all do all that we do.”

The pursuit of happiness is a constant aspiration since the beginning of mankind and has been the subject of continuing discussion all through out world history. People seek success, fame, wealth, health, gratification, acceptance, love and affection because of the state of happiness that they thought these human desires would bring them.

Daniel H. Pink, author of the book “A Whole New Mind”, observed that since the time of Scottish philosopher and political economist, Adam Smith, the wealth of nations is used as a proxy to determine the well-being of the nation. Whether life is better is measured in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), inflation, and similar economic tools. He noted that every American is three times richer today judging from the per capita GDP of the US, which is represented by the total value of goods and services that the country produced, divided by its population. But Americans do not feel one jot happier. He argued that there is ample evidence to prove that material wealth and broader happiness are no longer in sync in post-industrial societies.

Almost a year ago, BBC News Home editor Mark Easton reported that the science of happiness poses huge questions to politicians. Governments have succeeded in delivering greater wealth that has not translated into extra happiness. He cited the 1999 statements of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair that money is not everything but in the past governments have seemed to forget this because success has been measured only in terms of economic growth, or GDP alone.

They say that the idea that politics should be about ‘creating the greatest happiness of the greatest number’ dates back to the 18th century when British philosopher Jeremy Bentham advocated his principles of utilitarianism.

In 1972, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan coined the term Gross National Happiness (GNH) in an attempt to define the quality of life of his people in a more holistic and psychological terms as distinguished from GDP.  The King wanted to build an economy that would serve his country’s unique culture based on Buddhist spiritual value.  When he abdicated his throne on December 14, 2006, Bhutan’s economy grew by 14 percent and its standard of living is one of the best performing in South Asia.

They say that conventional development models stress economic growth as the ultimate objective. GNH, on the other hand, is based on the idea that true development of human society would take place only when both material and moral development is achieved by complementing and reinforcing each other. They further say that there are four pillars of GNH, namely: promotion of equitable and sustainable socio-economic development; preservation and promotion of cultural values; conservation of the natural environment; and establishment of good governance.

In 2006, British think-tank, New Economics Foundation, released its Happy Planet Index (HPI) based on the rationale that the ultimate aim of most people is not to be rich, but to be happy and healthy. In that index, Vanuatu, Columbia and Costa Rica were ranked as the first three countries with the highest HPI. The Philippines placed 17th while Bhutan ranked 13th. UK and the US were on the 108th and 150th spot, respectively. Zimbabwe was at the tail end.

The index seems to show that being rich is not the end all to attain happiness. People are happy for as long as circumstances of stability, peace, love and fairness exist in their midst. 

British Conservative Leader David Cameron is probably right when he said: “We should be thinking not just what is good for putting money in people’s pockets but what is good for putting joy in people’s hearts.”

In the end, government’s determination towards progress and development would lose all its sense when people are not happy after all.