Our version of “best and brightest”

The word “philosophy”, our college teacher Adelino Ong Castillo once told us, came from two Greek words philo (meaning love) and sophia (meaning wisdom). The philosophers of ancient Greece like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were acknowledged to have lived ahead of their time! They spent most part of their lives observing and interpreting what they saw around them. To explain the mysteries of life, intricacies of human nature, and their advanced views of government, they used logic and reason quite very differently from the then prevailing mythological explanations.

At the central parts of Greek city-states kiosks were built. Kiosks were open pavilions usually having the roof supported by pillars. On certain days of the week, philosophers and other men of brilliant minds converged at the kiosks to discuss, nay argue, about things believed necessary to develop their city-states and improve the quality of the life of their peoples. In that particular way of characterizing kiosks, they could be considered as the precursors of today’s senate, house of representatives, provincial boards and city councils and the philosophers of ancient times the senators, congressmen, board members, and councilors of the modern era.

I speak about kiosks and learned men in relation to the political events that will start in October with the filing of the certificates of candidacies of men and women seeking our mandates. If we were to approximate the glorious days of Greece, we need to elect our leaders in the mold of Socrates and company. To get anywhere that ideal, I propose three criteria of selection. We need leaders with pure hearts, brilliant minds, and verifiable programs.

The first criterion is rather difficult to discover. We must discern the kind of spontaneous body language and public conduct, fathom the unguarded pronouncements on critical social issues, understand the choice of crowds and societal preferences, monitor the candor, the humility and even the open display of idiosyncrasies of politicians. We all look for the outward expressions of the candidates’ heart. Admittedly that job is not easy.

The second criterion is relatively easy to spot. It will not take long for us to know the academic credentials of candidates. Knowledge is power. In the academe, the depth of such knowledge is measured by the accolades granted upon completion of studies. Those who graduated from their college courses with such Latin honors as Cum Laude, Magna Cum Laude, and Summa Cum Laude should be preferred. They reaped their academic laurels through a combination of gift and determination. It was not through chance that they were bestowed their distinguished honors by about eight different groups of teachers in a span of four years. They were screened thoroughly before being pronounced as honor graduates.

The third criterion can be studied. We, the voters, have to demand from candidates their program of government written or pronounced in unmistakable language. Before we cast our votes, we have to know what the candidates plan to do when elected to office. If possible, let their promises be reduced to readable prints or we might just be misled by jokes.

Do you remember the work of David Halberstam? If we shall have elected our leaders on the bases of those three criteria above, we can be sure that in our modern kiosks the best and the brightest will debate on how to ensure a better future for us.