Madelene A. Sta. Mary Department of Psychology, De La Salle University, Manila 

paper seeks to compare the idea of two matataguriang pagsasakatutubo led to the promotion of science-human here in our country: were Virgilio Enriquez and Zeus Salazar. The late Enriquez the recognized "Father of Philippine psychology" because of his tremendous efforts towards the development of a science-based culture and Filipino. recognizes Jesus Enriquez inside and outside our country for his writings about indihenisasyon of psychology. Salazar also leads to the formulation of procedures in the establishment of a national discourse that edify and makapagpapayabong a clear national consciousness. 

Salazar and Enriquez were united in the cause, they are united in establishing a social science pro-Filipinos and Filipinos . But, apparently they differ in their ideas on how to reach this goal. In a sham vision, they also seem to agree on essential elements pagsasakatutubo methods: they both saw the importance of using native language as scientific language, they both binigyangdiin the need to be critical to the use of foreign theories and methods, and they both stated that we must have, as the expert in the social sciences, a nationalist consciousness if we want to make an gating significant Activity in our discipline and be faithful to the reality of our culture. 

The Mental Tuligsaan by Enriquez and Salazar                                              But I know they have a disagreement, a relatively tuligsaan mental. To my knowledge, has to do with learning experiences of the Philippine-American. For Enriquez, it is a legitimate information first in Philippine psychology; for Salazar, this study does not matataguriang study psychology Filipinos. In the beginning, I too know and understand what the nature and the underlying dipagkakasundong it. Is it because Enrique is activist, and Salazar U is also a esensyalista? Is it because their different specialization-si Enriquez is saykolojist, and Salazar turn etnolojist? I did not asked questions 

in life more of Enriquez, because for me, it is asking about a delicate and personal items they might not tell me, because that as a humble student of two scholars, for I interfere with I should not interfere. In fact, we do not actually read each document expressed their disagreements and their arguments that brings their own mental stability. However, 

we mahihinuha that students satire written by Enriquez in his last book , Pagbabangong fame: Indigenous Psychology and Cultural Empowerment (1994), the appearance of their conflict: ... the credit for the controversial and unabashedly "emic" version of the pantayo perspective belongs to the French-trained historian, Salazar (1991). Charged with "reactionary ethnocentrism" he opts to practically limit His viewpoint to the confines of either a country ('nation') permanently circumscribed by the Philippine shores, with the contentious inclusion of Malaysians and Indonesians, presumably on cultural grounds. Since ethnicity doers not guide His version of the "pantayo" and Because of greater familiarity with the German situation as against the Filipino-American situation, he excludes the Filipino-American who speaks little or no Tagalog and all charges psychology and Filipinos in America with "elitism." Actually, he was disappointed with a letter from Susan fir- Ortega, convenor of the Philippines Yale University psychology conference, Because he was asked to present His paper in English instead of Filipino. He Might be pleased to know that the paper of the English professor, Epifanio San Juan, "Philippine psychology, psychology revolutionary" was delivered in Filipino and the American anthropolist, Harold Conklin, welcomed the participants in Tagalog, with a Mangyan accent. (Pp. 46-47) 

Why we still need to check the attacks upon this idea? Thus my answer to the question: First, we must analyze carefully the idea of the scholar to speak about the importance of culture in our review of psychology because only this way we can malilinawagan the role of culture in motion and human psychology. The tuligsang it principally and involving them in providing locally relevant research, is an importantmedium n gating towards improving research on culture and psychology. Second, we must trace the ideas shaping our science to see that we clearly and those who iimpluwens makakaimpluwens 

Filipino scientific work. 

Method in Discourse Analysis by Salazar and EnriquezTo malinawagan me to form mental differences by Salazar and Enriquez, naisiapn to check their first wrote about the underlying psychology and direction of the Philippines (Enriquez, 1976; Salazar, 1976) presented the first national kuperensya in Philippine psychology. In tests I conducted, I viewed the terms related to the integration-Filipino psychology, such as psychology, psychologists, science, Filipinos, when, Filipinos, and language. I noted the significant group of words used by each author in conjunction with the first mentioned words to produce a meaningful prose or sentence. Tinipun I together magkakasingkahulugang each author stating that agreements with each word relates to pagsasakatutubo of psychology. I also looked at ways of expression of each author. For example, what effect you want to convey to the reader or listener? Through this strategic review, I identified themes appear, about the pagsasakatutubo a science and the interpretation of each author about it. 

The Mental conflict Theme by Salazar and EnriquezThese themes appear in thought by Enriquez and Salazar about psychology Filipinos expressed during the first conference was about: 1) Psychology as a science, 2) information first of Philippine psychology, 3) method of psychologist Filipinos, 4) Activities of a psychologist Filipinos, 5 ) universality of knowledge, 6) the importance of scientific language, and 7) estimates foreign perspective. 

we now interpret every scholarly interpretations that have appeared themes: 1.   The Psychology As Science   The psychology for Salazar must involve culture, with Enriquez, culture and mahihinuha the process involves the individual, the process sikolohiko. Let me prove it by stating they wrote: According to Salazar (1976):

Until becoming part of Philippine culture psychology, until it becomes universal consciousness, toys remain just the psychology of some 'specialized psychologists' or otherwise of these toys will continue to foreign psychology turn instead of a broad tradition of psychology within its own culture Pilipino (p.34) . According to Enriquez (1976): In an initial psychological evaluation ... based on Philippine culture and Philippine languages, saw immediately that psychology is about consciousness ... consciousness ... mind ... spirit ... will. If so, the vast subject of psychology based on the concept of language malilinang Filipinos. (P.222) 

To Salazar, need to have the cultural traditions sikolohiko Filipinos have before Philippine psychology. Need to possess the scientific pansikolohiya Philippine culture fruit of another civilization (ie Western civilization) before a Philippine untold science. Therefore, required further interpretation incase Philippine psychology before it considered a psychological Filipinos. For Enriquez, the psychology in the Philippines that need only look at the emotion and purpose of human rights, appreciation must be given the character of the Filipinos to carry out a psychological Filipinos. The use of conceptualizing language adapted to the Filipino's way to cultivate and develop a psychology Filipinos. 

For Salazar, to recognize the foreign principles and structure of psychology. The work pagsasakatutubo will require a process of translating the system of meaning that make up the Philippine culture. For Enriquez, the psychology is foreign and native structure. More important in the process of pagsasakatutubo the grassroots classification we experience our psychological matatagurian. 

The important question may Ditto is: Is psychology a system of knowledge developed by several researchers and scholars about human experience? O Did this slogan we used to experience? Or, there is a difference between the definition of psychology in psychological experience? What is the scientific

pansikolohiya if pinagbabatayn is the cultural experience, and not the experience of mankind, whatever the cultural location? This question underlying the debate mahalagan current study of psychology: In anuanong becomes essential human experiences the culture, and how can generate theories about culture as part of psychological experience?

2.   The subject of psychology Philippine important in establishing a science of its defining its information first. This answer was given two sages. For Salazar, the subject is defined in the statement he said the purpose of Philippine psychology, which for him is: ... the estimate of common features, while cognizant that everyone is a temporary association with the stream of history ... The identify and explain how they [the characteristics of a particular group-MSM] is preokupasyon the present generation of Filipinos. (P. 45) According to Salazar, the question must give answers about the true nature of Filipinos and where and how it maipapahiwatig. 

According to Enriquez, the information first of psychology Filipinos are just told that in his reference on the basis of discipline: The psychology is about awareness refers to damdami't knowledge experience, the consciousness that determines the feeling around, the mind refers to understanding, the spirit that defines the character, conduct, or behavior, the mood also refers to feelings and the soul which allows to analyze also about the human conscience. (P. 222) 

we'll ditto that Salazar's emphasis on determining the subject is the temporary nature of Filipinos influenced by their current historical location. Meanwhile, Enriquez noted these phenomena need to study based on the derivative terms in our language related to information first or phenomenon studied in the discipline of psychology. Not much emphasis in the context ipinapaloob give shape and meaning to the phenomenon. 

This question can be applied to the subject matter of psychology Filipinos therefore about how to study the influence of culture in psychological experience. Sure enough focus on providing boasting of their experience psychological Filipino? Or do you give the corresponding evaluation context organize these experiences? The main question is still committed to another important debate and provides the underlying vitality of culture and psychology: Where is the culture? Is it indoors or outdoors person? 

3.   The method of psychology Filipinos It is also important in the establishment and development of a science determining metodo it. According to Salazar: More metodo and psychological methodology should check ... to Eavesdropping Filipino or as otherwise explicitly reject because they relevant to understanding or our understanding of the problems and goals in psychology. (P. 39) 

For Enriquez: ... the metodo must be culturally meaningful analyzes, or those who understood and accepted in the community ... It is contrary to suggest a foreign researchers may kasamg afraid when people interviewed ... Also , using the "interview schedule" will be strange because the farmers tried magmumungkhang when asked individually as usual in the West. For this reason, should just check the appropriate metodong [such as the method of asking questions, feeling and expression, Chatting, etc.-MSM] in Philippine culture ... (p. 238) 

Clearly Enriquez emphasized the appropriateness of metodo arawaraw in the life of the participants who give researchers real and true response. Salazar's turn, is important is the use of metodo related to this topic analyzes, based on the perception of psychologists on this topic, and also based on objective associate kalinangang Philippine Philippine character. If the subject is of Filipino pagbabansag their psychological experiences, what are eligible metodo to assess 

this dimension? If the subject is the context and how it ninuhubog the nature of Filipinos, what metodo fitting used to visualize and give clarification dinamikang it? 

4.   Psychologist work of Filipinos to Salazar For the main task of psychologists is to have the knowledge or understanding of the Philippine state. Must perform the work of the psychologist's orientation through their role as interpreter and duty to ensure, demonstrate, and apply the tradition of psychological awareness in the Philippines Filipinos. In Salazar's words: 

... In this work of adaptation, the flexibility of the findings in the field of psychological theory and methodology, essential translation, or the work of translators. In fact, the whole problem is a problemtranslation. This means that most psychologists in this generation should be high-grade and broad perspective, dependent on them for the seeding of Philippine psychology as a science adapted and combined from the foreign side. (P. 40) 

Clearly underlying this Activity is the knowledge of the psychologist in culture and social system of the Philippines. According rink is Salazar: Surely not apply in full any theory or approaches psychological Philippines, in our reality. Every culture, every work-and-make culture is a system (or part of a system) of the definition, the specifications, the symbolism. (P. 35) 

Salazar gave a warning in the application or task orientation. The warning was consistent with approaches used in "culture and personality" of research in anthropology, which tried to apply theory and knowledge in psychology illumination of the cultural phenomenon: On the adaptation, a warning: possibly not be do so in the spirit of verification of the theory by data from the Philippines ... The consequences of this pagpunpunyagi is part of anthropology called the "Culture and Personality," which is rooted U pinakaideya personality 

kinatatagpuan its culture. If this "y accepted as basic overview, all psychological theories must adapt to our culture or, more more than this, you should know are relevant to our lives. It appears, therefore, that consideration is pinakasentral culture Filipinos, the Philippine environment, and not any theory, which can reject or modify the explicit evaluation of the reality that Filipinos. (P. 36) 

I agree this was mungkahia Enriquez. He also values the adaptation or application of the theory of Philippine foreign to reality. According to Enriquez, Filipinos must descend the psychologist in their ivory towers to be meaningful to do psychology. As of Salazar, Enriquez suggested the need to adapt the theory relevant to life and society: Perhaps it's time to the global concepts and nanlalahat will turn to the analysis of the particularity or detail to determine if true then so is Filipinos ... Use the mgagamit from other countries and dispel the no ... (A) of the orientation of the theory have not been diagnosed and proven mkabuluhan life and society (pp.226, 239).

More Enriquez: ... still more to pay attention to the need to provide a competent person evaluating the specific character of Filipinos and Philippine citizens analyzes. (P. 228) Thus the direction of psychologist Filipinos Enriquez: ... recommended that the unity and communication researchers in different areas in the Philippines, because it is a sign of recognition and appreciation of Filipinos in his abilities.And associated with it ... need to cultivate trust and respect in its own capacity for greater self-confidence will become the way to more information and analysis on foreign theories (p. 239). 

prized Enriquez the waiver at low viewing the foreigners and Filipinos alike, the psychologist in the Philippines. To deliver as well this attitude Enriquez, we again read his written: ... the kaunang ever writing a nagpi-Ph.D. in psychology in America that 

"twenty years behind" U's Department of Psychology them. Passable only U and he went to America. (P. 225) ... the judgment of a foreign visit in the Philippines, "No one does the psychologist in the Philippines, ah. "(p.225) 

In the discipline of psychology itself, notably the looking up to Western psychology and the low I think the psychologists in the Philippines (p. 224). criticized Enriquez carefully he saw the low status of psychologists in the Philippines, and providing increased viewing in psychology and the work of the psychologist in Western: ... necessary foster trust and respect in its own capacity for greater self pagtitiwal path will become more analysis of information and foreign theories. (P. 239) 

While Salazar emphasized the "enhancing" the psychologist of their disciplines to understand the essence of the Philippines, also provided valuable Enriquez's attention the need to participate in cultural fact in the Philippines. According to Enriquez, requiredimmediate application of psychology in society and the Philippine experience, with Salazar, the main activities would also level of conceptualizing: ... the corpus itself of psychology as science developed, if not out in the west is not really problematic when individualized state shares Philippine-cultural ... The use of "knowledge" it specifically in the context of the Philippine environment he will be even give them a new sense or overseas, if they had real significance (p. 34) . 

authenticating to the words of Enriquez and Salazar's two main roles of psychologists in the study of culture: the mapagaaralang specify penomeno, and find relevant and give significance to pinagaaralangdisiplina society and culture. In the period announced by Enriquez and Salazar, their ideas, in the mid '70s, the found important task is the adaptation of foreign theory and knowledge in Filipino context. Noted that the time was not yet defined may be work of the psychologist despite adaptation, 

except what we read in Enriquez's words: The theory must be meaningful and relevant to the Philippine experience. not sufficiently adaptation of Western theories. The need is there theory rooted in the concepts, insights, and experience Filipinos. (P. 238) as we read the words of the goals of psychology Salazar Philippine addition to applying foreign perspective: ... Above all, surely we should have spread the tradition psychological. And duty of ensuring sikolohistang tradition, demonstrate, and apply the national consciousness. So the corpus to be functions of the sikolohistang increase is already starting synthesis for a psychology Filipinos. (P. 43) 

Direct Salazar challenged the Filipino sikolohistang when he mentioned that: You yata this work is comprehensive cooperation of anthropology and psychology. Whatever happens, precisely the socio-cultural environment that Filipinos will provide a socio-cultural environment of the Filipinos will provide a school of psychology. But this problem of sikolohistang Filipinos all over. (P. 43)

Verifying the words of the great Salazar challenges the psychologist surrin the ability of their discipline in the period required for isolate Task orientation and pay attention to the development of a discipline with a desire to illuminate the interaction of culture and psychology. 

5.   Universality of Knowledge More maipapamalas contrast views of two scholars in their discussion of pagkaunibersal knowledge. Salazar believes that the tradition in a particular culture will contribute to universal psychology. For with Enriquez, the existence of universal knowledge requires knowledge from multiple cultures. 

According to Salazar: While they pinapalago psychology of the spirit and effort Filipinos understand their own personality and essence of their country .. it is a palabinhian interactions become a creative change of 

psychology as science itself Filipinos. Ditto for the start of the Philippine contribution to psychology as a general science. All great contribution to any science is the product of a scientific tradition. And, whatever others say, each tradition is tradition scientist national or cultural. (P. 40) 

Every city, every region has maiaambag cultural psychology as a science general, pansantinakpan. And the contributions were correlated only preokupasyon of particular traditions and culture, a particular area. (P. 41) 

Where sikolohiyan makakaambag the Philippines? It happens in the field of pinakapreokupasyon Philippine society and culture. But this does not occur until the Philippine tradition of psychology has not yet formed. (P. 41) 

According to Enriquez: So the use of multiple cultures, multiple languages, and multiple metodo is relatively an important technique or approach ditto [a universal science of psychology, MSM] because the method used is not alone not just one culture and one language is grounded. (p. 229)

The Philippine psychology should not be involved and to either side when-pro-pro-universal or particular; in nomotetiko or ideograpiko though different topics or fields in psychology Filipinos can classify according to rank accordingly. Ie, subjects or fields may be more appropriate to view that universality eg human biology and genetic pakakawangki different race. However, there are issues rooted in particular when, as related topics of social psychology, psychology kognitibo, culture and pagakatao. (P.229) 

clearly different interpretations by Enriquez and Salazar in the universality of knowledge. Salazar believes that when universal is not found in the level of penomeno or experience, but the interpretation of mastering this culture and psychology of this phenomenon. Providing explanations and relevant to our analyzes we contributed was becoming 

a universal knowledge. Here we understand that when universal is related to providing understanding particular. Enriquez was also looked at universality as a sign of uniformity of experience, uniformity of observations. May be fields in psychology that this similarity will occur and expectations. There are also other areas that do not look at the similarities if not in the nature of events or experiences unique to everyone. Here at last count the study of psychology and culture. Therefore, the universality of knowledge for Enqiruez is related to the definition of universality in positivism, the observation of an event at most. The universality also for Salazar is related to its definition interpretatibong outlook need not observe at most one event to validate its importance. Jesus Enriquez is devoted solely to his pinagkadalubhasaang the psychology discipline. Now Salazar is also devoted to his being etnolojist. 

6.   Scientific language According to Enriquez, said the pagsasawika of psychology at Filipino to reliable research results, and to have the concept that has meaning karanasn near the Philippines. These are the words of Enriquez: Broadly the subject of psychology based on the concepts malilinang in Philippine languages. (P. 222) then that means more reliable the results of research in psychology to the use of Philippine languages, so still the Fate of the study. (P. 229) 

More effectively setting a definition technical concepts meaningful to the Filipinos than relentless adaptation and embodiment of wild concept. (P. 232) According to Salazar, the Filipino pagsasawikang part of psychology that are relevant to the social conditions in the Philippines is a way to bring the experience and awareness of the majority's psychology and consciousness become common. Salazar mentioned this: Filipinos have isawikang large part of psychology may relevant to our social status. In my opinion, not be 

effective and meaningful if it manantili psychology out of the experience and awareness of the majority ... Alongside all, you must have discipline or discipline sikolohistang Philippine writing in Philippine languages. Their contributions must be made to the beginning or beginning in Philippine languages. It will also help the development of national culture terminology. (P. 44) 

Here we see that not much vary the two scholarly thought about using language to be more meaningful discipline livelihood of Filipinos. I agree that they need to use the language understood by most and reflect the experience of it. They only differ in their identification of clues about the scientific language. In my opinion, the language used in science according to Salazar was still in the process of mastering this tread providing clarification on the psychological experience. Enriquez's turn, the language of science is found to be used in providing the most boasting their experiences. The work of psychologist and define used this slogan. Through it, be honest with her psychologist inilalarawang experience. Therefore, with Enriquez, no difference between the phenomenon of the concept. 

We also have a visible difference in definition to the locals that right by using the language. For Salazar, the loyalty of career is relatively inaccessible to enter and include awareness of the majority. For Enriquez, the honesty in this study are readily approachable if used is the language of these analyzes. 

7.   Foreign Experience Philippine Perspective About The "foreign" perspective is related to the theory and concepts generated in other cultures, or interpretation of foreign researchersevents in Philippine culture and society. Salazar is a belief that the foreign perspective in providing clarity to psychological experience is rooted in srili their cultural fact. Using this insight requires a deep understanding of the emergence of these insights into cultural backgrounds, and knowledge about the culture of the area kunsaan 

held the study. Salazar's words: The Philippine its conversion to [foreign ruler, eg. MMPI-MSM] will require a deep understanding of culture not only Americans and its goals, but your own Philippine culture. (P. 39) The use of "knowing" itself in the context of kapaligitang Filipinos he was indeed give them a new or further meaning, if they had real significance. (P.34) 

In view also of Enriquez, the use of foreign theories and concepts provides a distorted description of the Philippine experience. must first assess the foreign perspective before use in understanding the status of Filipinos. These are written Enriquez: The frequent references to the perceived behavior and characteristics of Filipinos as "mañana habit," "flame heath," and "Filipino time" stemmed from the perspective of foreigners is very dangerous sapagkit not yet diagnosed. (P. 224) 

Perhaps it's time to the global concepts and nanlalahat will turn to the analysis of the particularity or detail to determine if indeed true so the Filipinos. (P. 226) The remarkable that the main interest in psychology became Filipinos [emphasized by the author-MSM] are those perceived qualities of the Filipinos and ethnic groups in the Philippines, for sure until the study of the features that only betting on the psychology of the Filipinos. (P. 226) 

Nanghihinala Enriquez was the motivation for researchers to continue using foreign perspective in their study: What happens going looked like "scholarly" because there are "foreign terms. "The use of" foreign terms "in" social science "is impressive sometimes, but sometimes forms of deception in the minds of readers. (P. 227)