"Kapwa" as a Window to Connect "Sikolohiyang Pilipino" to Western Psychology through Object Relations Theories

Having been privileged to provide psychological and pastoral services to Filipinos, I am always reminded   that kapwa, which is often translated as “shared self”,  characterizes the fundamental quality of human relationships.  Because I was primarily trained in predominantly Western psychological theories,  I make conscious efforts in integrating Western psychological perspectives and Filipino psychological perspectives in serving clinical and pastoral needs of Filipinos. 

Filipino social psychologist, founder of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) , Virgilio Enriquez  (1989) argues that “kapwa” is the very foundation of the Filipino value system and center of Filipino personhood.  It is also a psychological, as well as spiritual, manifestation of a fundamental human desire for fellow beings.  

The most intimate form of this desire of seeking fellow beings is a courtship.  An image of courtship, reflecting this fundamental human desire to seek another being is reflected in King Solomon’s Song of Songs, while it stems from God, the Creator, said that humans should not exist alone (Genesis 2:18).  Kapwa  reflects this aspect of human roots in our Creation story, as well as courting story in Song of Songs. 

Though very unique to Sikolohiyang Pilipino(Filipino psychology), kapwa really captures the essence of human personhood – both psychologically and theologically.  

Psychological aspect of personhood as relational has its foundation in attachment theories of John Bowlby, D. W. Winnicott, and Mary Ainsworth.  Based on these attachment theories, establishing a secure mother-child attachment in the first two years of life is of critical importance for a person to develop a healthy personality and to enjoy meaningful interpersonal relationships, including matrimony.  It is also important to grieve meaningfully – when there is a loss, as Bowlby (1980) indicates. 

To me, “kapwa” in Sikolohiyang Pilipino echoes the essence of attachment theories, as well as object relations theories  of  Ronald Fairbairn and Melanie Klein.  In fact, attachment theories can be considered as a part of object relations theories as Bowlby, Winnicott and Ainsworth all touch upon object relations. 

Object relations, including mother-child attachment, are how we understand self in relation to other human beings and our surrounding objects.   As Lavinia Gomez (1997, p.1) states,  a concept of object relations is a unique development in British psychiatry, distinguishing it from the traditional Freudian drive theory, placing object relations at the heart of human personhood .  It means that object relations theories distance from Freud’s view of understanding who we are through biological drives, such as sexual desires. Therefore, object relations theories are important not only in clinical psychology but also in social psychology.

Objects, to which we relate ourselves in order to understand who we are,  go beyond who and what currently exist now –because  these objects certainly include what is in our memories – even though these objects are physically non-existing now.  Having object relationships can be understood as “anamnesis”(recalling to memory, recollection), both theologically and psychologically, as well as philosophically. 

Though Plato, in his Meno, argued that it is futile to seek knowledge of another person because we cannot to get to know this person unless we know of his/her personal attributes. He further argued that  there is no point of seeking it at all had we known the attributes. In response,  Socrates,  on the other hand,  in his concept of anamnesis, argued that it is not futile to seek knowledge of another person because knowledge of another person, regardless of our knowing of his/her attributes,  itself is in the immortal soul from eternity and is a form of incarnation of the knowledge.   Socrates further said that it is meaningful to seek knowledge of another person because his/her knowledge is buried into oblivion in the shock of birth, echoing Buddhist’s view on birth as a form of suffering.   

Perhaps, Plato would not appreciate object relation theories as he thought it is nonsense to seek knowledge of another person.  It seems that Plato’s view – Platonic concept of human relationships – seems to honor being totally independent and autonomous to a point of isolating ourselves from each other. However, Socrates’s view encourages us to strive in object relations to refine our self concepts, and his appreciation on anamnesis lays the philosophical foundation for object relations’ validity and applicability to objects that are physically lost but eternally remains in our memories.  And, they may incarnate in our object relations.   Understanding self in relational context  - through myriad of object relations in life – is how we develop and appreciate self – to take further from Socratic view. This also reflects kapwa as a fundamental self concept in relational context. 

This anamnesis aspect of object relations is very important in providing grief counseling because, as Bowlby (1980) indicated, attachment (a form of object relations) and grief correlate. In other words,  higher the degree of attachment,  the heavier the grief can be, when the object of attachment (a form of relationship) is lost. 

This leads to a theological appreciation of anamnesis aspect of object relations.

During the Last Supper, Jesus took some bread and gave thanks, broke it and gave it to the disciples and said, “This is My body, which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me” (Luke22:10; 1 Corinthians 11:24). In doing this, Jesus was fully aware that he would not be with his disciples physically any longer as this was the night before his Crucifixion.  Clinically, this is an expression of anticipatory grief, which is also an aspect of object relations – an expression of object relations, in which the object is anticipated to be physically lost. That is why Jesus was reminding the disciples of anamnesis aspect of the object relations they had formed and shared so that the pain of their grief after his death would be alleviated.  This sure makes Jesus a great psychologist that I strive to model after. 

In addition to its anamnesis aspect, objects in object relations theories can be fictional. Having object relations with fictional objects is a fantasy and serves its purpose in dealing with unfulfilled with and desires – especially the aforementioned fundamental human desire for forming object relations with other fellow beings.   Living in isolation hurts and can lead us into a host of psychopathologies. 

Bedsides the fundamental human need for having other beings in our object relations, as appreciated both in the concept of kapwa in Siolohiyang Pilipino and object relations theories,  Richard Rubens (1994) explains that object relations in Fairbairn’s view reflect the fundamental human motivation for self-expression in relationship, for being building blocks for the constellation of self, other, and relationship between. In this regard, given a theoretical compatibility between kapwa and object relations,  kapwa can be understood as a form of expressions of interpersonal relationships.

Now, we can better relate Sikolohiyang Pilipino to Western psychology by reassessing kapwa in light of object relations theories, including attachment theories, which represents British psychiatry in distinguishing itself from the old school of Freudian continental psychiatry.  This kind of cross-referencing is very important in providing more competent and compassionate clinical and pastoral services to non-Western people, such as Filipinos, - even though Filipinos may be seen as “Westernized” among non-Westerners, because of the Philippine’s unique cross-cultural history.