POOT AMIANAN: UNDERSTANDING THE ILOCANO PEOPLE’S

PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE

Marc Ivy Raphelin Allan P. Sales

School of Humanities – St. Louis University

December 10, 2016

I. Introduction

In the parlance of the Ilokano language, understanding is translated as “awat” which

signifies two distinct meanings. First, it means “an insight” and second is “to receive”. We

understand in order to gain a perspective or a better vantage point. Such is the tacit sense of the

term understanding, that is to “stand under” like a person who stands under the vast night sky

with its clouds, stars, and celestial bodies. Same with the word insight, as a form of seeing within

like a man who probes the inner musings of his heart. The other sense connotes a form of

obtaining or gaining a knowledge from the given point of view. This paper aims to unravel the

nature of philosophy in the “Amianan” (North) using the lens of Michael Polanyi in his

discussion on personal knowledge and conviviality. It also intends to answer the following

questions: “Is there an Ilokano Philosophy of Knowledge? If there is, what is it? and What is its

significance in the life of this people? Aurelio S. Agcaoili provides a good preliminary note

before embarking on the understanding of the Ilocano way of philosophizing by introducing the

concept of saritaan and sukisok in his introduction to The 2006 Nakem Centennial Conference.

In his words,

The return to saritaan is both a rite of resistance and reclaiming. It is discourse

through and through, premised on trust for what the word can do to open up new
worlds, new vistas, new truths that are as tentative as the very power of language
offers to its owners, users, residents, indwellers but premised as well on the kind of
symmetry needed for a genuine speech to come about… This saritaan intersects
with sukisok, the act of searching and re-searching in order for knowledge to come
about, come anew into the consciousness, so that when present in the
consciousness, knowledge will give light.[ CITATION Agc06 \l 13321 ]

Hence, Ilokano philosophy is basically grounded on the language in the form of discourse and

the act of searching or researching as a method of further understanding and deepening one’s

rootedness in the Ilokano culture and heritage. This forms the poot or consciousness of the

Ilokano. It will also direct each one towards the Ilokano way of life that strives to cultivate
humanity – man’s moral and intellectual capacity, and within this capacity, the potential for the

development of sound judgment, reason, efficient interaction, and lifelong learning.

II. The Ilokano Understanding of “Being”

Martin Heidegger grounds his concept of “Being” as a distinctive concept that is

grounded on the understanding of the human person’s or dasein’s own being. “Dasein is an entity

which does not just occur among other entities”[ CITATION Nat92 \l 13321 ] Dasein otherwise

known as the being-in-the-world, in its state as an entity thrown in the world, always maintains a

relationship to “that Being”. In his discussion in What is called Thinking, Heidegger presents a

new perspective towards the manner of gaining knowledge that is through thinking. He says:

[What is] most thought-provoking in our thought-provoking time is that we are still
not thinking… Thought-provoking is what gives us to think. Some things are food
for thought in themselves, intrinsically so to speak innately. And some things make
an appeal to us to give them thought, to turn toward them in thought: to think them.
[ CITATION Hei54 \l 13321 ]

According to Heidegger, man may have the potentiality or capacity to think but it is not enough

for one to have the capacity to think unless there is Being. Being is said to be that which is most

thought provoking. Being therefore serves both as a food or nourishment and a gift or a token for

the dasein. Being is also thought-provoking because it is mysterious as its truth partially hides

and opens up itself known as the Greek word “aletheia,” the folding and unfolding, the

concealing and revealing of being.

In one way or the other, Heidegger’s presentation of the significance of Being in the act

of knowing is tacitly congruent with Polanyi’s concept of objectivity. In his exposition, Polanyi

endorses the view of seeing the outcome of scientific research as something that demotes a

human being to ‘‘a mere grain of sand in a million Saharas,’’ thus reflecting the narrative

according to which Copernicus had ‘‘ousted’’ humanity from the center of the world. However,

objectivity is also a form of invitation and inspiration in order for man to overcome his
minuteness compared to the whole universe. He is overcoming this condition through his mind.

Man, sees that there is rationality in nature. Such, manner of understanding the universe is man’s

profound expression of committing himself to a clearer vision of reality because things are seen

in their entirety inclusive of their meaning and purpose and not practically suspending certain

characteristics which may contaminate the pure or raw data of truth.

Whenever one is prompted by Being he is called towards greater objectivity to truth and

reality, one thus receives a gift and must be thankful to the giver. However, thinking as a form of

gratitude demands a valuable response. Thinking demands intent listening to Being. Sometimes

one ends up rejecting the gift because of the failure to listen attentively to the promptings of

Being. Thus, thinking is also thanking. To thank is to acknowledge that the essence of being is

action. As for the dasein being therefore is to be human, to live authentically and to care for and

preserve the essence of the human person.

The Filipino term for “Being” is “Meron”, “being” - “pagmemeron.” and for “aletheia”

one uses “pagka-hindi-nakakubli” or “paglalantad”[ CITATION Roq91 \l 13321 ]. These terms

also have their dynamic equivalence in the Ilokano language. For Being, we use “adda” as

formal correspondence

and for “pagmemeron” and “aletheia” we use the term “panagrangarang” as an encompassing

word that denotes a manner of unveiling or unfolding. Agcaoili states that:

The question of being, in the Ilokano thought, is a question in the realm of

existence: adda. Or the substantive, panagadda. Or another substantive, in its
abstract form, kinaadda. It is movement from its extreme, awan… There is the
movement of the ‘adda’ from ‘awan’, and that ‘adda’ can include the ‘awan’.
‘Adda’ as ‘there-is’ includes ‘awan’ as – ‘nothing’, or ‘no-thing’.[ CITATION
Agc16 \l 13321 ]

This is manifested in the expression of our ancestors as they say: “A, kastoy la ti biag:

awan lat’ adda.” “Life is like this: only nothing is here.” This statement somehow provides
a link as to how the Ilokano’s “poot” or consciousness has always been immersed in the

metaphysical realm that he deems inseparable from his mortal life. Therefore, the Ilokano

understanding of being is grounded on the pursuit towards the meaning of life. A life in the

grassroots of his heritage, tradition, and culture. It is a life that must be constantly defined,

the definition never final, always unconcealing, and always tentative, exploratory,

unending. It is a life that is always in the constancy of a flux and the ethical obligation to

keep defining it is a constant.[ CITATION Joh88 \l 13321 ]

The Ilokano Ontology of the Self

Appropriate epistemology leads to the understanding of the Ilokano ontology. In

understanding the being of the Ilokano one considers the following concepts. First is “nakem”

and the other is the “kinatao” of the Ilokano. Agcaoili gives a profound definition of the term

nakem as the very consciousness and core of the Ilokano:

“In a sense, nakem is what gives us grace – this “us/we” as agents of goodness
being multiplied, of greatness being attained, of the ethically plausible being acted
out. While nakem can be a state of being – “nanakem” – it can also be a state of
becoming – “agnakem” – with the flux in between the energy and the eros, the
“gagar”, the “derep”, the “rugso” to drive the actor to seek the meaning of life
within him and outside him.”[ CITATION Agc06 \l 13321 ]

The “kinatao” or the personhood of the Ilokano is on the other hand an ideal and a

project. The humanity or the human-totality of the Ilokano or the being of the Ilokano is not a

subject seen as a being standing alone. The term “kinatao” can be dichotomized. First, “kina”

serves as a prefix that purports a relationship. It is likened to the prefix “ka” of the Filipino

language but “kina” is more comprehensive because it is a prefix that does not only embrace the

subject, it also captures the existence of the other in relation to the subject. The second is “tao”
which refers to the human person. John Macquarrie upholds the importance of the individuality

of the human person as equal to his sociality. He states:

Each human being has a self-identity that differentiates him from every other. He
says ‘I’, he calls ‘mine’ a particular strip of history, which extends through memory
into the past and through anticipation into the future, and to which he is giving
shape and direction by what he is doing in this present moment. So each human
being is a unique irreplaceable centre of freedom and creativity, engaged in his or
her task of fashioning a unique human life-story.[ CITATION Joh82 \l 13321 ]

Nevertheless, the word “tao” in “kinatao” does not simply refer to “myself” - “tao” but

also to “the other”or my “pada a tao”. Immanuel Levinas captures this perfectly in stating: “We

become aware of the face of the other long before we see (and then only indirectly) our own

faces.”[ CITATION Joh82 \l 13321 ]

The Ilokano ontology of the self presents that through one’s “nakem” and “kinatao” the

“tao” and the “pada a tao” has an “epistemic union.” This is the Ilokano ontology of the self,

that is, the Ilokano is always aware and conscious of the existence of the other. This epistemic

union is both personal and collective. Personal because it is in the form of a personal knowledge

that is honed by emulating the very art of camaraderie and respect being taught by one’s elders.

Polanyi explained this with reference to apprenticeship:

“By watching the master and emulating his efforts in the presence of his example,
the apprentice unconsciously picks up the rules of the art” So the transfer of tacit
knowledge consists in the imitation of physical gestures. Drawn, written about,
mimed (like sign language). [ CITATION Pol62 \l 13321 ]

Polanyi will go further: for a suitably observant student will copy not only the types of

conscious actions which could be described equally well in words (“hold the hammer by the

handle, lower the metal head in an arc…”), but also “those which are not explicitly known to the

master himself. These hidden rules can be assimilated only by a person who surrenders himself

to that extent uncritically to the imitation of another. Finally, consequent upon this is a
sociological rider about generational relations: “A society which wants to preserve a fund of

personal knowledge must submit to tradition”.[ CITATION Pol62 \l 13321 ]

To illustrate the concept of “kinatao” or the use of the term “kina”, the following words

may serve as good examples. The term “kinamanakigayem” means “friendly” or “to befriend”.

This word connotes a relational bond between a person and his friend or group of friends. As

John Donne stated, “no man is an island” the Ilokano recognizes the significance of the other.

Next is the “kinamangaasi”. This word means sympathy and mercy. A person does not

show or exhibit the character of sympathy or mercy to himself. He always extends this virtue to

others. Another is the use of the term “kinasalunat”. Kinasalunat means to wish for one’s good

health. Does one wishes good health only for himself? Seldom we hear the answer yes for this

question. It is because, whenever one wishes for a good health, he is always thinking of the

family or those whom he or she is supporting. One thinks of good health because a better health

may mean that all the more such individual can help others. Consequently, the Ilokano ontology

of the self is a pure manifestation of conviviality as a profound and wonderful cognizance of a

life that is enjoyed with the presence of the other.

However, there are moments that the Ilokano becomes selfish. This implies that is not his

real Ilokano self already. When the Ilokano becomes “makasarili” or “imot” this is a

manifestation of his identity being mystified. Here, the hypostasized self of the Ilokano is

emerging. This is due to the colonial perspectives as well as the homogenization of the mode of

thinking where people becomes accustomed in taking the Eurocentric mindset. This is the bold

claim in the face of the world and defining oneself as the producer of human knowledge, and

epistemological police of the new world order. Heidegger would then remind us that we are
simply guardians of the “logos” and are bound to respect and preserve the essence of things.

Thus, one needs to redeem and regain his identity. This is known as “subli” or “panagsubli” a

manner of going back and reclaiming the lost self by once again looking into the ontology and

the meaning of being an Ilokano having “nakem” and “kinatao”.

The Ilocano ontology of the self transcends human understanding of being in communion

because it “names those moments in which the possibility of an ethical respect for selfhood, a

selfhood that is marked by cultural change, discovers or reveals itself to be conditioned by

alterity, or by condition of being-with-others.”[ CITATION Tho06 \l 13321 ] This is known as

“becoming”. The Ilocano acknowledges his totality as a being towards becoming humanly and

socially historical. A man of culture and tradition. A being of heritage.

III. The Question of Ilokano Knowledge

Wisdom for the Ilokano, is “sanut,” or its more collective form “sansanut”, and the word

for reflection or the manner of pondering is called “panagmenamena”. A philosopher is known

as “manangayat kadagiti sansanut” directly translated as lover of wisdom. He has this innate

“tarigagay ken ayat kadagiti sansanut a mangitunda iti wayawaya.”. The philosophy enthusiast

should have an immense desire and love for wisdom that leads to freedom. Nonetheless, this

lover of wisdom should acknowledge that philosophy is not only an academic endeavor done

with an elitist culture which leads to bourgeois knowledge. One should see that there is also

philosophy among the masses of the people.

The philosophers work is to find relevant integrations of the knowledge gained by human

thought and the human life as the very direction where knowledge should be applied. The facets
of human life holds “logical interconnections and conceptual distinctions that are essential for

thinking.”[ CITATION Gar12 \l 13321 ] Agcaoili describes the philosopher in a very simple and

straightforward manner as he states:

The wise person in the portmanteau we call philosophy is a product of

‘proceeding’, of ‘learning’, of ‘discerning’, of ‘knowing’, of ‘finding’. The
philosopher is wise because she discovers the way to knowledge, but is herself not
necessarily knowledgeable about the ways of the world, but is instead a pilgrim. As
a pilgrim, the philosopher is always on the lookout for the road – that road to
knowledge, to wisdom, to learning, to proceeding to other journeys, other roads.

Thus, when the philosopher or the Philosophy enthusiast deals with the reality of the

Ilokano and his Epistemology, he should deal with the manner of proceeding, learning,

discerning, knowing and finding that the Ilokano employs in his day to day living. Consequently,

all of these are deeply imbedded in the culture of the Ilokano. Agcaoili ascertains an

understanding of the Ilokano form of knowledge that is in agreement with Polanyi’s discussion

on conviviality, he suggests:

In recognizing the beginnings of human knowledge as we understand it today, we

realize that there is no set of logic that prohibits and prevents us from looking at
other forms, other models, other possibilities. This is also in keeping with the fact
that ‘the science of nature’ has yet to give us a full explanation of what is in there in
nature and so is ‘the science of the human and the social’ – also called ‘the science
of the cultural.’ A rereading of many cultures and societies and their models of
human understanding and thus, their own version of ‘human knowledge’ would
make us realize that human knowledge comes in various forms and packaging
depending on so many variables, including the variables of the cultural and the
linguistic.[CITATION Agc061 \l 13321 ]

Towards the Formation of an Ilocano Knowledge

Man, by nature is homo loquens.[ CITATION Bro94 \l 13321 ] He is a being that speaks.

By speech, man brings out things from nothing into existence. The world exists in itself but it

only becomes real to man only when he is able to name them. By human speech one gives

“form” to the realities in the environment. Since he is homo loquens it follows that man is also

homo socialis and homo culturalis.[ CITATION Bro94 \l 13321 ] Man by nature is both social
and cultural. Man is a fruit of a social act and grows in a social ambiance. The same goes with

culture as a social heredity which every individual receives and transmits.

Thus, in understanding the Ilokano Philosophy of Knowledge, one needs to have a good

grasp of the Ilokano culture. What is the connection of the Ilocano culture in the formation of the

Ilocano knowledge? One can never speak of the Ilocano without speaking of his culture. The

totality of the Ilocano intersects with the totality of his culture, his world view, and his lifeworld.

Whenever one raises the question “Who is the Ilocano?”, he must always involve a knowledge of

the Ilokano culture. The “kinatao” of the Ilocano is anchored on his culture and whenever one

talks about the culture of the Ilocano through philosophizing one reaches a certain knowledge

about him. Therefore, what is the Ilocano philosophy of knowledge? It is an epistemology that is

rounded on the Ilocano cultural life. We therefore situate and get the knowledge of the Ilocano

and of his relationship with the world and his fellowmen from his culture.

There are several illustrations which can be utilized to elaborate more on the concept of

Ilokano Epistemology as grounded on Ilokano cultural life. First is “Panagsangaili”. Dwelling

in the Ilokano context goes beyond the common understanding of the abode. For example, the

term “Amianan” is commonly referred to as a point of direction known as the north. In the case

of Poot Amianan, “amianan” here does not simply mean ‘north’ or a reference to a particular

locus such as northern Philippines. “Amianan is the minds of those who revere it, seek it, and

desire it, from amongst the many who may have lived their lives away from it. Amianan, as in

the concept of ili, resides not only in the confines of geographical territories but in the

consciousness of the Ilokano people.”[ CITATION Flo06 \l 13321 ]

The Ilokano Epistemology of the abode or the Ilokano knowledge of home is very

different from the usual understanding of a dwelling place. Whenever a person visits an Ilokano
abode, the Ilokano always says: “Apo, anusan yo ta bassit daytoy kalappaw ko.” Please bear with

our tiny abode. This expression is a manifestation of the Ilocano epistemology of the abode

because whenever the Ilokano speaks of his house, he refers to a small Nipa hut we often call

“bahay kubo.” “Even though the dwelling place of the Ilokano is already palatial and marbled, he

still thinks of his “bahay kubo” because it is not the externals of his house that correlates to his

words when he says “Apo, anusan yo ta bassit daytoy kalappaw ko.” It is the simplicity of his

home despite the external features of his palatial house.[ CITATION Ald16 \l 13321 ] This home

is not simply a house but the dwelling place of the “kinatao” of the Ilokano as presented in an

excerpt of one Ilokano poem entitled “As-asug ti Maysa a Mapapaay” “Agonies of One Often

Despaired”:

“Iti lagipmo dikanto idian

Ditoy Ili a nakayanakam,
Nupay ragsakto laeng ti kalak-amam,
Dinto koma ipalubos ta gasatmo a didiay pakaibatiam.”

Please do not banish the memory

Of the place where you were born and raised.
And should you in the future be blessed with happiness.
Let not your destiny lead you astray.[ CITATION Sor06 \l 13321 ]

Second, whenever the Ilocano entertains his guests for a meal he says: “Umay kayon to

mangrabii jay balay mi.” “Come and have dinner at our home.” For sure one of the dish that he

will serve is the “Pinakbet”. Now the Ilokano epistemology of food is being presented. Pinakbet

is an indigenous Filipino dish from the northern regions of the Philippines which is made from

mixed vegetables steamed in fish or shrimp sauce. What can one learn from the “pinakbet” of the

Ilocano? One immediately says that it is “aglalaok.” It is all mixed up and is comprised of

different vegetable ingredients. However, though it is composed of different vegetables still it

can make an impressive taste that is unique and special. Thus one may say that “nu anya ti
kanen na, isu’t ibagbaga na panggep kanyana.” What the Ilokano eats is what he is. Through the

Pinakbet the Ilokano is stating that there is a unified character within his kinauneg or loob. This

is something that characterizes the Ilocano solidarity within. This is the reason for term, “Solid

North” that has been popularized in the “Amianan” culture. From this enters the concept of the

Ilokano community that is teeming with many expressions to show the unity of the Ilokano

people. One example is through “tagnawa” or community sharing. Whenever, the Ilokano

people holds a feast or a thanksgiving, all the neighbors would help and they share the task

amongst themselves. When the Ilokano also invites people in the event of a harvest in the rice

and cornfields other farmers and even their wives and children would help without expecting

anything in return. “Makapagtitipon da” “they are united” is a quality that best describes the

Ilokano way of coming together although they have different personalities and different values.

They can make an impressive community, like the pinakbet. The vegetables that are present in

one abode just as in the song “Bahay Kubo” so are the Ilokano people whose hearts reside in the

Amianan.

The third is language. At the heart of the Ilocano communicative relation is language.

One may say that products are not the unifying force that grants the identity of an Ilocano as

compared to other places. It is the Ilokano language that serves as his unifying core. Just as

Martin Heidegger stated, language is the house of being so is the Ilokano language that serves as

the dwelling place and fortress of the “kinatao” of the Ilokano. For example, when an Ilokano

goes to another place like Manila or another country perhaps and at one point he hears someone

speaking the Ilokano language, he immediately says: “Ay ket Ilokano ka!” “You are an Ilokano!”

Whenever he goes abroad, he first looks for another Ilokano because they are the ones whom he

likes to talk with or converse with. “The Ilocano, although he has a universal character speaks his
language wherever he is. The Ilocano language is very rich and it is incomparable to other

languages.”[ CITATION Ald16 \l 13321 ] Even with the actions of the Ilokano there is a

“maianatup a sarita” an appropriate word to be used. For example, when the Ilokano is carrying

something heavy, the term used is “bagkat”, when the load is light it is called “awit”. There is a

proper term for every action.

The Ilocano language is very rich because it is basically founded and established in the

richness of his life. Language is really at the heart of the Ilocano because “ti linguahe na ket isu

iti biag na.” “His language is his life.” The universality of the Ilokano character is being

emphasized through language. The Ilokano does not want to lose his language because it is the

very fabric that forms the mantle of his being.

One may notice that there is an articulate framework that is being emphasized here. There

is an appropriate philosophizing known as “maianatup a panagripirip”[ CITATION Ald16 \l

13321 ] This is the appropriate way of understanding the life of the Ilokano, and the

Epistemological method towards a knowledge of his identity. This is an indigenous method that

is very instrumental because it permeates in the very unique and peculiar lifeworld of the

Ilokano. Appropriate philosophizing is not isolating. The Ilokano philosophizes according to

appropriate situations that is through “pakikibagay.”

IV. Applying Ilokano Philosophy in Education

There is a proverb in the Ilokano way of intellectual discourse which says: “Adda adalna

ngem awan sursurona” – He has formal education but he does not have the capability to discern,

or to know or to learn. Here the dichotomy of “adal” and “sursuro” is being presented. Adal ken

sursuro are distinct. One is the concept which is “adal.” The other is the praxis which is the
“sursuro.” Adal is the theory while sursuro is the application. Agcaoili vividly distinguishes

these two concepts, according to him:

“Adal is acquired, passed on, perhaps having an external form, as in a vestment,

or something attached to the skin. On the contrary, sursuro is internal as it points
to the inner workings of one’s person, the human within, the person that is unseen
but felt, experienced, judged, related to… Adal literally translated, is education, or
more specifically, formal training. Or better yet a formal education, the one that
runs the gamut from apparatus of the state in order to equip a person with skills
and competencies. Sursuro is ‘uridaw’ (temperament or character), ‘kinatao’
(one’s person), ‘galad’ (bahavior), ‘ugali’ (attitude).[ CITATION Agc16 \l 13321 ]

Therefore, one sees the ideal Ilokano or the ideal person as someone who exemplifies

both adal and sursuro, the adal reinforcing the sursuro, and the sursuro giving clarity to the

utilization of the adal. In the current context of the Educational System in the Philippines, there

lies the ensuing proposals to implement unprecedented changes in the academic curriculum,

threatens educational institutions in a neoliberal experimental position. Many Academic

institutions aggressively pre-empted such transformation. It has already provoked theoretical

responses from those seeking to defend the value and significance of the humanities. The unitive

component of these responses is the desire for a recovery of the public function of the humanities

(and philosophy in particular) on the basis of its civic prospective, an objective which establishes

the programs for discourses about the value and necessity of such disciplines within education.

Adal has become counterproductive because “it has become a means towards better

profit”[ CITATION Nus97 \l 13321 ] making disregarding the essence that sursuro carries.

Formal education with the pursuit of scientific knowledge has already placed the demarcation

lines as to who are the people needed to create a better world in the future, and in the Ilokano

parlance, they are those with the adal. Agcaoili states:

Education is supposed to develop critical thinking in the educatee, Education is

supposed to equip the educatee with that capacity to discern, to think through an
array of alternatives, to critically reflect about decisions that pertain to the good
 life in both its individual and social dimension. However, in today’s class-oriented
society, education has become the preserve of the elite – the bourgeois and the
petit – bourgeois classes – with education not valued for itself but valued as
investment, as a means to reinforce one’s hold in society, and as a means to
enhance one’s capability to take charge in that dynastic way of public governance.
[ CITATION Agc16 \l 13321 ]

This understanding should lead us towards the good life. However, what is the good life for the

Ilokano? For the Ilokano “adal” ken “sursuro” should lead towards greater “wayawaya”

freedom, liberty. “Wayawaya” is the core to being human, to being Ilokano, to the being-and-

becoming of the Ilokano and this for him is the good life. “Kinawaya” is a concept of aspiring

for greater freedom, a freedom that is not only for a single person towards the fulfilment of his

“kinatao” but for the whole “sangaili” the nation, and the people of the land guided by the

“kinalinteg” uprightness and lawfulness.

Thus, one may realize that “Philosophy is a revolutionary weapon”[ CITATION Lou71 \l

13321 ]. The Amianan philosophy of knowledge is geared towards a knowledge that is

humanizing and liberating. At the backdrop of all these is the concern on genuine social

transformation. The “panagbalbaliw” “a change” that is needed to happen not only in the

external realm of society but also within the nakem and kinatao of each and every person.

The realm of liberal education serves as the rightful place of Ilokano Philosophy in

education. It should encourage and teach educatees to make a “baringkuas”-a jolting from a

deep slumber and the coming into full consciousness afterwards – and this should happen so that

“nakem” and “kinanakem” may commence.

V. Conclusion
There is a need to have a decentered doing of philosophy which is focused on the

philosophy of the grassroots and heritage of the people. This is presented by the paper through a
tacit discussion of Polanyi’s concept of conviviality. In Polanyi’s concept of conviviality, this is

very implicit, that knowledge is the absorption through interactive relationships. Out of this

interactive dynamism is a “Knowledge-ever-alive”. The term conviviality is taken from the term

“vivus” which means life. The joy of living together and out of living together is a “living

knowledge”. This is a knowledge that is open minded. The Ilokano epistemology is characterized

as a living knowledge established on the foundations of appropriate philosophizing which can be

called “mainatup a panagripirip”. Appropriate philosophizing means appropriate seeking of

knowledge. “Maibagay” because it will always be based on the culture. The culture should be

the source of knowledge. The person or life that you are understanding or trying to know should

be the source of knowledge. What is the life of the Ilokano? His life is simple.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agcaoili, A. (2006). Ilokano and Aminana Studies, Northern Luzon Cultures, and the Universities from
the Regions: Towards a Theory and Praxis. Final Proceedings of the 2006 Nakem centennial
Conference (pp. 56-67). Honolulu, Hawaii: Nakem Conference, Inc.
Agcaoili, A. (2016). Sanut ken Wayawaya: The Case for an Amianan People's Philosohy of Knowledge,
Freedom and the Good Life. Philosophical Association of Northern Luzon 12th Conference.
Agcaoili, A. S. (2006). 2006 Nakem Centennial Conference. Saritaan ken Sukisok: Discourse and
Research in Ilokano Language, Culture, and Politics (pp. 3-4). Honolulu, Hawaii: Filipino
Centennial Celebration Commission.
Althusser, L. (1971). "Philosophy as a Revolutionary Weapon," New Left Review.
Caputo, J. D. (1988). Radical Hermeneutics: Repetition, Deconstruction, and the Hermeneutic Project.
Studies in Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy. Indiana: Indiana UP.
Docherty, T. (2006). Aesthetic Democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ferriols, R. J. (1991). Pambungad sa Metapisika. Quezon: Office of Research and Publications, Ateneo
de Manila University.
Flores, M. C. (2006). Amianan Studies: Theory and Perspectives. Final Proceedings of the 2006 Nakem
Centennial Conference (pp. 40-54). Honolulu, Hawaii: Nakem Conference, Inc.
Guting, G. (2012, January 25). "Philosophy-What's the Use?". The New York Times .
Heidegger, M. (1954). What is Called Thinking? (F. Wick, & G. Gray, Trans.) Germany: Harper and Row.
Jaranilla, A. (2016, November 26). Conviviality and The Ilokano Philosophy of Knowledge. (M. I. Sales,
Interviewer)
Macquarrie, J. (1982). In Search of Humanity. New York: Crossroad.
Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education.
Massachussetts: Cambridge University Press.
Oaklander, N. (1992). Existentialist Philosophy: An Introduction. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Pabillo, B. (1994). The Bibe 100% Divine 100% Human. Makati City, Metro Manila : Salesiana
Publishers, Inc.
Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal Knowledge Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul Ltd.
Soria, E., Basuel, R., & Sori, M. (2006). Ilokano Women and Ilokano Literature: Initial Attempts at a
Literary History of Ilokano Women Writing in Ilokano. Initial proceedings of the 2006 Nakem
Centennial Conference (pp. 155-225). Honolulu, Hawaii: Filipino Centennial Celebration
Commission.