Conceptualizing and Measuring Modern Democracy 33 doubt. They are then vulnerable to being recruited by the powers that be and eventually lend their prestige and expertise to anything but democratic national administrations. (Quite a few of those who served in the Marcos Cabinet as well as many who served the past Arroyo administration are of this liberal mindset. Many like-minded Filipinos are in active service in the present Aquino administration too.) Ÿ Lapses of this variety of professional misjudgment, according to Gunnar Myrdal (1968:23), author of the classic Asian Drama: An Inquiry Into the Poverty of Nations, may be induced by biases deeply rooted in the very psyche of social scientists probing deep into sensitive concerns of highly stressed, often poverty-stricken societies. Civility could block an academic's tendency towards seeking the truth and "blunt truth speaking." So Myrdal, addressing scholars and not sparing himself, cautions: It is the ethos of scientic inquiry that truth and blunt truth-speaking are wholesome and that illusions, including those inspired by charity and good will, are always damaging. Illusions handicap the pursuit of knowledge and they must obstruct effort to make planning for development fully effective and successful. For this reason the present book [Asian Drama] is intended to be undiplomatic. In our study we want to step outside the drama [of punishing, widespread poverty in most Asian countries] while we are working. We recognize no legitimate demand on the student to spare anyone's feelings. Facts should be stated coldly; understatements, as well as overstatements, represent biases. (His own even more straightforward footnote to the passage quoted above also acknowledges the general bias of academics towards optimism in their investigative work. Civility in reading disconcerting country developments obviously is facilitated by a sense of optimism that in turn enables analysts to be a lot more civil in writing up and reporting on their not too-welcome ndings.) Ÿ In the current project on Philippine democratization, one may suspect that the universally iconic stature of democracy helps sway academics towards awed, wishful readings of Philippine history and the record it offers on the question of democracy in this country. For Filipino social scientists already strongly enamored with democracy in particular, a great temptation exists to believe that the object of their love has already materialized in their own country. There is much truth in the folk saying that "Love blinds" or, at least that it temporarily disorients. Even topnotch professionals, some high-grade political scientists no less, have actually convinced themselves that their Filipinas is vested not only with the trappings but, even now really, with the full regalia of Democracy. Aspirational mindsets are a sine qua non for all those who work to democratize less than democratic regimes. However, a caveat needs sounding: especially for academics who seriously bear the responsibility