In which communication contexts might you use the view that presumption rests with existing institutions?
In a communication context of Filipinos showing respect by saying po and opo to the elderly and those with higher authority, we can see that the presumption rests with existing institutions.
For example, during my internship, I met someone the same age as me but had worked longer with the company and was a part-time employee. Instead of calling them by their name, I would automatically use honorifics and answer with a po; despite being of the same age, I recognize that we do not have the same level of authority and follow the existing institutions in place to show respect.
This may also happen in everyday conversations with people we may presume is older or carry more authority in any instance.
For example, during my internship, I met someone the same age as me but had worked longer with the company and was a part-time employee. Instead of calling them by their name, I would automatically use honorifics and answer with a po; despite being of the same age, I recognize that we do not have the same level of authority and follow the existing institutions in place to show respect.
This may also happen in everyday conversations with people we may presume is older or carry more authority in any instance.
I agree that we can base the presumption on authority, especially in the Philippine setting.
That's correct, Majet! I relate to your example of using honorifics towards those the same age as me yet exhibit authority. The use of po and opo is ingrained in our culture, providing our communication practices as Filipinos a unique identity.
I also experienced similar situations. During our freshman days, I usually addressed the higher batches as "ate" or "kuya" to show respect to them because they have been staying in the university much longer than I do; hence, they were more knowledgeable in the field. Despite this, most of them were of the same age as me, and some were even younger. However, even though I was aware of this, I still addressed them as "ate" and "kuya" because I also recognized that we were not on the same level of superiority in the university.
I agree, Maj! Same with your experience, during my internship, I feel uncomfortable if I do not use po and opo when communicating with those with higher authority even if we are the same age as them. For instance, one HR Specialist communicated with interns casually because she has the same age as us. However, since I acknowledged her position in the company, I always communicated with her formally and respectfully. Moreover, even in email or chat on Google Spaces, I tried to include po and opo to sound formal and polite when communicating with her.
I had a similar experience, Majet! My internship supervisor does not like being called "Sir" and communicated with "po" and "opo" due to his personal preferences. However, I would always use these forbidden words, as he believes, during an interaction with him. With my upbringing, I was taught of recognizing a person's age as a basis of authority which embedded an unconscious effort to use the terms like ma'am, sir, miss, and po and opo when conversing with someone older. Perhaps, I have developed a presumption that older people hold more experiences--hence, giving them superiority over me.
I agree, Majet. Regardless of who I am talking to, I always say po and opo like it's a requirement. One time, someone from my org pointed it out, and my response was, "Sorry, default na sa 'kin." I guess it's how I was trained when I was a child.
I agree, Majet. The use of "po" and "opo" is like a default setting for Filipinos. For the past few years, most of the seniors I met in my organizations would tell me to lose the "po" and "opo" when talking to them. However, I still use it unintentionally not only when talking to my seniors but also to everyone. I even feel uncomfortable sending emails without the "po" and "opo" because it sounds disrespectful.
Great example, Majet! Honorifics have truly been embedded in our culture as Filipinos as a sign of respect to our elderlies.
I experienced this also, Majet! During my internship, I had a supervisor who was younger than me, but I would always use the honorifics "po" and "opo" when talking to her.
I agree, Majet! During my internship, my supervisor told us to call him in his first name, which I and the rest of my co-interns did. However, being a Filipino who was raised to show respect to those older than me, even if it is only a year, I still kept my po and opo when communicating with him to show respect.
I can use the view that presumption rests with existing institutions in a classroom setting. For example, in a zoom meeting, the students would have to wait for the teacher to talk first and start the class. In turn, students will participate the discussion when the teacher asks a question.
That's a great observation, Sai! Your example is a presumption in our everyday lives as students. It shows the authority a professor holds in the context of a Zoom meeting, which is the same if they were to hold a face-to-face class.
This was something I experienced too, Sai! I can even speak on instances wherein a teacher raised rhetorical questions, and because of the tone they spoke in, I had answered on reflex. There are definitely some deeply ingrained existing institutions within a classroom. For example, when there is no teacher present, a class representative may pose as the authority figure to keep the peace. This role typically goes to the class president or batch representative.
On spot, Sai. Proper netiquette is one of the basic must-dos in an online learning set-up.
In an intercultural setting, those from different countries/backgrounds will attempt to communicate in English since it is a universal language.
Imagine that you are in Japan for a vacation. You can ask a police offer “Where is the train station?”, oftentimes accompanied by nonverbal cues. When an individual is not a native English speaker, we use basic sentence structures or communicate common English words that they may understand. Another example would be professional exchanges in business and intergovernmental organizations (e.g., United Nations), where messages are usually delivered in English.
Imagine that you are in Japan for a vacation. You can ask a police offer “Where is the train station?”, oftentimes accompanied by nonverbal cues. When an individual is not a native English speaker, we use basic sentence structures or communicate common English words that they may understand. Another example would be professional exchanges in business and intergovernmental organizations (e.g., United Nations), where messages are usually delivered in English.
This is a great example, Reena! Sometimes people even use sentence fragments to better communicate basic information to non native speakers because our presumption is that commonly used words like train and station are more understandable than terms like subways or trams.
I agree, Reena! There is a presumption in an intercultural setting to speak in the universal language, English because we assume that people will better understand what we mean.
Good observation Karmela! This is something that I overlook entirely since it is such a normal response. When I am asked for directions, I usually speak in Taglish or English, even with non-foreign individuals. This is because I am used to seeing more landmarks or traffic signages in English, making the conversation smoother if I were to use the language.
Interesting idea, Reena! I’d also like to add to your idea of the English language being considered as a universal language. I think more than being universal, it also holds a presumption that the English language is transactional. Deriving from your example where natives who are not fluent in speaking the English language often use nonverbal cues and resort with simple English words, we could see how these natives still tend to this language in order to communicate with the person they are talking to. Unfortunately, it is also evident how many people from different races and different backgrounds still try to practice the basic command of the English language despite the unfamiliarity of the language because we were taught to associate speaking in English with being well-understood and/or well-articulated with our ideas with the other person.
This is something that I agree with 100 percent. In a local setting, we may presume that Tagalog is a language that every Filipino can understand even when we visit faraway islands in the Visayan and Mindanaoan regions.
This is interesting, which can also be seen in social media sites where anonymity is present, such as Twitter. Usually, if someone has tweeted in English, you would also reply in English to let your message come across regardless of someone's nationality. It also applies to communicating with sellers on an international platform, whom you would automatically talk to in English in the presumption that they could understand you better through the language.
In a supposed conversation between a master and a student, a known form of argument which is the argument of authority might take place. This is a good example of how presumptions rests with existing institutions because those who hold seniority or knowledge of a certain subject are often times automatically favored than those with a different view. Much like a fight between parents and their children wherein the presumption is that the child is automatically wrong, existing institutions and beliefs are thought to exist in favor of the prevailing authority which are the parents.
I agree, Jared. Indeed, it is true that in most communication contexts, those who hold seniority in a particular field are usually deemed correct compared to the opposing side. A professor is usually more knowledgeable than the student, a manager is more experienced than the new employee, and parents are always thought of as wiser than their children. Therefore, the majority always favors those in higher authority.
This is a resounding argument, Jared! I find it very observable in how the authoritative presumption always rests in academic institutions and extends even beyond that (i.e. parent-children relations). Although at one hand, this authoritative presumption can also be a breeding ground for conflict in most interpersonal communication. Conflicting values, beliefs, and perspectives often collide with an authoritative presumption especially when two arguing individuals have different roots and lines of argumentations.
This is a great example, Jared. Aside from the context of seniority, I think the culture of Filipinos also affects this presumption. Our parents are our first teachers. They teach us what is right and wrong, and they are assumed to be wiser than their children. We even have the saying "papunta ka palang, pabalik na ako". This justifies your notion that the child is automatically wrong in an argument with their parents.
The view that presumption rests with existing institutions can be seen in the context of communicating within a group of people that holds firm value on authority or hierarchy. This specific context can be observed in a typical Filipino household, as Filipino families give high significance to the concept of respect, especially to the elders when communicating. Children must respect their parents and anyone older in the household as it has been a norm that they know better because they have more experiences in life than us. For instance, when we are communicating our opinions, and it happens that our stand is opposite to theirs, our ideas would be thought of as the wrong ones. During this situation, we only acknowledge and respect their response instead of prompting an argument. Thus, in this context, the parents or elders are considered as those in high authority—they are usually deemed as the correct ones because it is believed that they are more knowledgeable than the younger ones.
Great points, Pau! I agree with what you said about parents and elders are often considered correct because of their high authority and age. With this, as their children, I think it is sometimes difficult to express our opinions because it is automatically assumed that they know better than us. However, in my experience, since most of the parents I encounter are now open-minded, parents and elders are now more willing to hear our ideas and even consider those right. Thus, the presumption that those with higher authority in Filipino households are often considered correct changes over time.
I agree! This may also be the reason why as children, we have to explain and provide different reasons as to why they should allow us to go out. Also, parents may view us as precious to them, and so their presumption maybe is to let us stay at home to be safe, and that is why we need to change their belief by providing proof that where we are going is safe, and that we will do the right things while we are there.
I agree with you, Paula! Personally speaking, this is the reason why I grew up meekly and unable to share my opinions freely. I was raised in an environment where my thoughts are deemed unnecessary and a sign of disrespect. As a child, I did not understand why my words were perceived that way, but now, I think it may be due to my lack of understanding of the situation and poor communication skills. But whatever the case, parents being authoritative figures and children being submissive is undoubtedly true.
The view that presumption rests with existing institutions is evident in the context of communicating with elders in local churches. Oftentimes, religious elders are perceived to have authority as they lead, guide, and serve their local congregation of the church. With this, religious members communicate with them with respect. Applying this to my experience, even though my father is older compared to one elder in our congregation, he always communicates with respect and utilizes words such as opo, po, and oho to show high regard for the elder’s position and authority in our congregation.
That's a great observation, Pauline! It made me remember how my grand mother, who is obviously older than our newly appointed priest, never missed using honorifics such as father, po,and opo when talking to him. She, as a member of the Opus Dei, would correct the priest after the Holy Mass yet would still use po as a form of respect. I believe both of our family members' behavior only reflects how much we value our religious elders as an authoritative agency in spreading the Gospel, that we unconsciously use honorifics.
I have always observed this as someone who grew up in a church. Even though they're significantly older than some of our church leaders, my father and mother show huge respect by using "po" and "opo" when communicating with them.
100% true! Filipinos by nature are respectful and subservient to people in authority, especially to members of the clergy, regardless of age and/or position. I believe it is a trait inherent in all our countrymen as it was deeply ingrained in our culture and tradition passed on to us by our ancestors.
Same thoughts, Pauline! As someone who studied in a Catholic school from grade school to senior high school, we were always expected to observe proper decorum in churches. I have also experienced volunteering in our parish's community service in which I often interacted with the members of the congregation and other volunteers. Like your father, I also show my utmost respect to these individuals by using 'po' and 'opo' when communicating with them as well as through non-verbal gestures like 'pagmamano' whenever I bump into our parish priest/s.
I agree! Elders and parents nowadays are more open to two-way communication when communicating with their children as compared to before.
If there is one institution with highly evident presumptions, I believe it would have to be research firms/institutions. Research centers hold two primary presumptions: 1) scientific research findings are always backed by data and are done through a scientific process; and 2) a research topic or problem is observable and feasible to be investigated. These two presumptions serve as the pillars for evaluation and discourse among researchers and scholars in a firm or institution. I believe these two presumptions are well-defined in terms of how they guarantee credibility and validity not only of the research study itself, but that of the researcher/s and the whole firm.
That's a nice observation, Rome! The research community does have a huge belief and trust that the two presumptions you mentioned are followed at all times in order to make studies as credibility and valid as they can be. These are actually are actually important presumptions since the findings of a research are powerful when used in the right (and wrong) contexts; they can change lives. A great example of this would be the studies on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. It might have been a different story if the presumptions did not exist altogether.
I agree! I usually talk to researchers and whenever I go into a deep conversation with them about serious topics, they always ask me for my references.
Jargons are used by different professional fields on a daily basis yet cannot be applied in the general context. An example is our situation during the onset of the pandemic whereas several interviews with medical practitioners and government officials were presented in the news everyday. There were several terms that the public was not profoundly aware of like social distancing, PPEs, contact tracing, immunocompromised, and flattening the curve among others. What exactly are these terms? Hence, public education was necessary with the presumption that the public lacks knowledge of these terminologies and must be informed to flatten the curve. It goes the same when reading your x-ray results on your own. There is a presumption we recognize that only your attending physician can elaborately explain what it indicates and what procedures you have to take as it is their profession. Hence, it is presumed that they have the credibility and sufficient knowledge to treat you.
That's a great observation, Sophia! Thinking about it, there must have also been presumptions by the medical practitioners that the general public was as knowledgeable as them with regards to "Pandemic terms" which is why they used it casually. I think it is interesting to consider that these could actually be two-way things.
Great points, Pia. I would also like to add that due to that presumption, the health sector has a natural leadership role in providing reliable information on the status, risks, and interventions related to health or medical situations. Therefore, the general public and non-health sectors depend on the communication efforts of the health sector to make well-informed decisions. The same is also observed in physician-patient relationships at the micro-level, as you mentioned.
That's an interesting take, Pia! In the practice of medicine, physicians are considered authorities and experts considering their rigorous education and clinical practice. Furthermore, they have also taken the Hippocratic Oath. Thus, there is a presumption that they will be employing the best of their ability and judgment in attending to their patients and in administering treatments.
The immediate setting I could think of is school. In any learning environment, especially in our country, the student is expected to give utmost respect to the professors even through words. This has been taught to us even as early as preschool. Addressing our teachers with “Miss” or “Sir” and saying “po” or “opo” has been ingrained in our minds since we were young that when we get into university and professors say that it is okay to call them by their first name or even in countries where that is the norm, it irks us and makes us feel awkward. Just the same, teachers are expected to talk and teach their lessons fit for the class level. When discussing complex concepts like the stars and the universe to children, it is better for teachers to use simpler words and demonstrate their existence using toys or objects. While mentors in college use deeper words (like celestial body of gas, supernova, etc.) and theories (like the Big Bang) to explain the concept.
That's so true. Even in the workplace, I failed to outgrow this. Some of my workmates and supervisors tell me that I should address them by their first names, but I couldn't help to add "Miss" or "Sir." It feels off whenever I call them without formally addressing them as such.
Good point Alex! Like Shekinah, I was also too afraid to call my boss using their first name or not say "po" even if he instructed me to do so. I have always been taught that by not saying "po" would be disrespectful and people would think I grew up without manners.
One communication context that I could think of where the presumption rests with existing institutions is sports, specifically when a referee calls a foul. Because the referee has the authority, what he or she calls is taken with such gravity, and players could only do so much as to complain and explain what happened in hopes of the referee changing its call.
Hi, Kimbert! I certainly agree with your answer. The referees serve as the highest authority in any sport or game; that is why their words and decision pose such weight and impact. Maybe that's why when people are desperate to win, they approach and bribe the referees, resulting in a 'luto' game.
Interesting! That's a good catch. Never thought much about how deeply the presumption of a referee influences the outcome of the game. Also have never thought much about how rarely players challenge the rules and regulations.
As a sports fan, particularly of basketball and volleyball, I completely agree with you, Kimbert! A referee's decision, whether bad or good, is final and executory. It cannot be altered or modified anymore unless you want to receive a technical call.
While reading the prompt for this forum, the first thing that came to mind was the context of religion (Catholicism specifically). Ever since I was a child, my parents ingrained in my mind that every time I attend a mass, I should observe silence and proceed with utmost caution and respect to avoid disturbing others. Even though I do not know the people inside the church, I should remain courteous by using 'po' and 'opo' and include them in my 'peace be with you' greeting.
I believe this is brought upon by the culture that Filipinos grew up in, wherein people are expected to be respectful no matter what context they're in.
I believe this is brought upon by the culture that Filipinos grew up in, wherein people are expected to be respectful no matter what context they're in.
I also recognize the presumption that silence is linked with sacredness, Rachel. In religious communication contexts, observing silence may be a way of showing respect not only to the preacher and other churchgoers but also to God. Other forms of nonverbal communication are also expected in that context, such as dressing modestly, arriving early at church, and properly sitting, standing, or kneeling.
The first thing that came to my mind was correcting someone older than us or those with higher authority. Sometimes, it's hard for us to correct even a simple mistake, like mispronouncing a name, because of the presumption that older people or those with higher authority should not be easily questioned or contradicted, because they are always right.
I remember watching "Matilda" when I was a kid, and I totally relate to her. People would constantly tell that adults are always right and you can't question them as a kid. If you correct them, even with the nicest and sincerest tone and manner, some might get offended and punish you for being disrespectful.
I remember watching "Matilda" when I was a kid, and I totally relate to her. People would constantly tell that adults are always right and you can't question them as a kid. If you correct them, even with the nicest and sincerest tone and manner, some might get offended and punish you for being disrespectful.
I totally agree with you Shek! I was also able to observe this within my family growing up. Parents (especially Filipino parents) believe that correcting or questioning someone older or with higher authority is considered rude and disrespectful.
In the legal field, all those accused are considered innocent until proven guilty. The presumption of innocence is a fundamental constitutional principle and a right guaranteed by the 1987 constitution. Most people would immediately judge those who are accused. However, lawyers defend even those who are charged with the gravest crimes. They do not easily deny their clients because of the presumption of innocence.
I agree! The presumption of innocence is fundamental especially in the current context where some cases are highly publicized and already deemed guilty by the public without the rule of law. This is a reminder that, as communicators, we should be able to navigate this kind of landscape.
I agree, Llara! One thing that comes to mind when talking about presumption of innocence is former President Duterte's war on drugs. It is so heartbreaking to see and hear in the news that there were people who were killed without any due process. They were killed since they were said to have used, trafficked, or sold drugs even without conclusive evidence.
We may see this on the road, especially when you get pulled over by a traffic enforcer or a cop. In this context, we always presume that we as motorists are at fault and have something to be liable for. Even when we think and presume that we did nothing wrong, we always presume that the officer of the law pulled us over because we did something unabiding with existing traffic rules.
“The customer is always right.” In communication contexts wherein businesses and consumers interact, there is this notion that delivering superior customer service is at the core of the business’s success. Therefore, employees communicate to customers with the utmost respect. Whenever a customer complains something about the product or service, the presumption is that the customer service representative will do his/her best to meet the expectations of the customer and provide the best customer experience possible—rather than just trying to prove that that product or service is without fault and that the customer is simply wrong. In worse cases, this presumption may have led to inappropriate customer behaviors toward employees. Indeed, “the customer is always right” is acceptable only to the extent that the customer is also reasonable.
This is an interesting take! I remember watching several Facebook reels which are skits of the said situation, and indeed, the said presumption can be dangerous in several instances, especially when it becomes an excuse for a customer to disrespect employees. This also should be a way for the management to support its employees and stand their ground that their employees should never deal with unreasonable complaints and even threats, instead of letting such situations happen continuously.
The proper decorum in a webinar is an example of how the view of presumption rests with existing institutions. Usually, the hosts, speakers, and facilitators are the ones who are in charge of the meeting room and the viewers are expected to communicate through the agreed-upon online etiquette (e.g., using raise hand feature to call attention, muting mic when not speaking). This kind of set-up creates favorable atmosphere of engagement between parties.
A communication context where presumption is very much present is among news agencies. Just as others have mentioned, there is usually a presumption of authority among institutions, which goes the same for news agencies that can be treated as authorities for credible information. This is especially seen in how most Filipinos go to the official social media accounts of the news agencies and almost automatically absorb their posts as correct information. However, it is interesting to note that the said presumption of authority is used against credible news agencies and in favor of fake news peddlers. This is seen in the case of Rappler and ABS-CBN, where several users theorize that because of their presumed authority, it becomes an avenue for them to forward subjective and biased information without telling the truth. On the other hand, SMNI and PTV benefit from the presumption of authority, with their misleading and misinformed news being treated as real.
Nice observation, Marielle! News agencies is indeed a communication context wherein presumption is applied. Although it's sad to see how this presumption of authority has diminished since.
This is an interesting illustration, Marielle. It is truly frustrating how decades of service and commitment in purveying relevant information are easily supplanted by hatred and ungrounded criticisms. This is especially the case for ABS-CBN. The independence of the fourth estate is hardly recognized in our community today. The presumption of the authority vested in the press and media is now weaponized for political gains.
In the field of Science (and in extension, science communication), theories and facts are presumed to be true unless new proof says otherwise. Thus, we operate on existing proofs to certify the truthfulness of a claim.
I often hear science communicators using phrases such as "research suggests" or "a new study found", but some also omit these disclaimers all together. I think we can attribute this to the presumption that a fact is indeed true given enough evidence.
I often hear science communicators using phrases such as "research suggests" or "a new study found", but some also omit these disclaimers all together. I think we can attribute this to the presumption that a fact is indeed true given enough evidence.
This exemplification is very evident among scholarly works across disciplines, Jaime. In addition, the presumption that a theory is either true or false, in the context of a social science theory, gives an avenue for future researchers to extend or improve the theory in terms of its explanatory power.
In a trial court, the presiding judge must be referred to as your honor. In British courts, they are even more dramatically addressed as right and honorable justice or lady justice. This suggests that the person seated on the center bench, usually in the more elevated part of the court, is presumed to be just, honorable, and trustworthy to interpret the law/s applicable to or relevant in arriving at a decision. In other words, the presumption of authority to decide on legal matters is vested in the person addressed as your honor or honorable judge/justice.
Some institutions inculcate specific cultures within their own communities. One example is from my high school institution in Lourdes School Quezon City. We greet our teachers, regardless of their ages, by doing the Filipino tradition of mano. This has been the culture within LSQC for as long as I can remember and even if we've already graduated, the culture still remains and it is still the way we greet our teachers. This is a primary example of how the presumption rests with institutions given that this culture is not replicated in all educational institutions and only in LSQC.
I would like to discuss about hierarchies, especially in Asian cultures. Elders are considered sacred especially in the family setting. Outside the bloodline, we are expected to give respect to those older than us, like the automatic "ate/kuya" or "po/opo" regardless of the age if we are talking with strangers. For me, when people use honorifics to me, I cringe because I do not see myself as an authority figure, but when someone asks me to drop the honorifics, I physically cannot do that because I am wired to be respectful whenever I'm speaking with someone I'm not close to.
I can relate to this on so many levels, Elaine. Since I am a transferee, people usually refer to me as "Ate Aly" or greets me with "po" or "opo." It is a weird feeling whenever I am greeted this way since most of them are the same age as me, but I can completely understand how it is difficult for them to drop the honorifics since I also experience difficulties doing so due to Asian culture.
In medical institutions, such as hospitals, doctors' words are taken as the gospel truth. We always talk to them as subservient and compliant as possible as if they completely hold our lives in the palm of their hands. Even if we do not understand any of the medical parlance they utter and even if they importunely nag us with annoying advices and ignominious sermons, we presume that their authority is unquestionable and we usually just say "amen" and obey their orders without any complaint.
I can relate to this, Rachelle. There was this one time where my brother was falsely diagnosed with "tuberculosis" – and we believed the diagnosis because of the presumption that "doctors are always right." Since tuberculosis is considered infectious, we had to isolate him for a month or so – only to find out later that it was a misdiagnosis. Nevertheless, doctors still hold my family's lives in the palm of their hands since we still see them as those with the authority in making health decisions.
This is an interesting observation, Rachelle! We are so used to think that doctors "know it all" because it took them several years of education and practice to have that medical degree. Sometimes, it is not only us who have this presumption but even the doctors themselves. Some doctors who think that they "know it all" demonstrate this thinking through their behaviour towards their patient and co-workers.
The view that presumption rests with existing institutions can be seen in the communication context where authority is deeply rooted within a group of people. Specifically, this context can be seen in ROTC, which is an NSTP program that aims to provide military education and training to students. As we know, there are certain ranks in the military – where the higher up you are, the higher your authority is.
I remember when I was in high school, my classmates and I were not allowed to speak unless our commanding officer spoke to us or ordered us to speak. In turn, we would only speak when spoken to by our commanding officers. There were some commanding officers that were the same age and batch as us – however, we were wired to respond to them with "Sir, yes sir!" or answer them with their specific honorifics due to the setting. In military settings, the commanding officers are the law. If they tell you to do 30 push-ups because you "looked them in the eye," you have no right to argue with them as they are the ones with the higher authority. Similar to parent-child relationships, commanding officers are usually presumed to be "always correct" because it is believed that they are more knowledgeable and have more experience than the cadets. Thus, the view that presumptions rests with existing institutions may be seen in the context of ROTC where bias is present towards the prevailing authority, which are the commanding officers.
I remember when I was in high school, my classmates and I were not allowed to speak unless our commanding officer spoke to us or ordered us to speak. In turn, we would only speak when spoken to by our commanding officers. There were some commanding officers that were the same age and batch as us – however, we were wired to respond to them with "Sir, yes sir!" or answer them with their specific honorifics due to the setting. In military settings, the commanding officers are the law. If they tell you to do 30 push-ups because you "looked them in the eye," you have no right to argue with them as they are the ones with the higher authority. Similar to parent-child relationships, commanding officers are usually presumed to be "always correct" because it is believed that they are more knowledgeable and have more experience than the cadets. Thus, the view that presumptions rests with existing institutions may be seen in the context of ROTC where bias is present towards the prevailing authority, which are the commanding officers.
The view that presumption rests with existing institutions is evident in the context of religion, which influences various societal norms and plays a significant role in shaping an individual's morals and values. This explains why the Philippines, a predominantly Catholic country, still fails to legalize abortion, same-sex marriage, and divorce—which are all considered to be against the teachings of the Catholic church. Consequently, conversing about these topics with individuals who are heavily inclined towards the religion tend to be challenging as they hold stronger religious beliefs that cannot be contested by others. Furthemore, efforts to justify the need for abortion, same-sex marriage, and divorce and to call for their legalization are often refuted and invalidated because as Catholics, we are presumed to conform to the church's teachings and practices.
The view that presumption rests with existing institutions is evident in the workplace hierarchy. During my internship, I was introduced to a supervisor who was actually younger than me. However, given that she was staying with the company longer than I am and I was a new intern, I referred to her as "Ate" and used "po" and "opo" to signal her superiority.
In communicating contexts of discussing about finances, the taboo on discussing openly about money, especially with adults, can be observed in almost all institutions. Discussing your income, spending habits, and budget are topics that rarely come up in a standard discussion. Most parents hide money conversations from their kids. Even the school system leaves it out of the curriculum. There has always been a presumption that discussing openly about money is considered rude and inappropriate. Furthermore, it was always believed that talking about it would only make people uncomfortable and its best to leave it out of the discussion. This lack of communication on discussing finances leaves children to grow up without learning how to manage them properly.
A communication context where the view that presumption rests with existing institutions is used is in the workplace. For example, when an individual is working at an accounting firm, one will presume that they were employed because they were found to be very qualified and fit to take on the job. This is how people viewed Mike Ross, a character from Suits, because THE Harvey Specter, considered the best litigator in the Big Apple, hired and mentored him. Only when people found out about the fraud did they realize that while Mike may have an extensive knowledge of the law, one that even surpasses Harvey's, he did not attend Harvard Law and ultimately, didn't have the license to practice law during that time.