Perdebatan Realisme-Antirealisme dalam Filsafat Agama Kontemporer

Authors

  • Muhammad Rodinal Khair Khasri Faculty of Philosophy Gadjah Mada University
  • Fuad Abdullah Harahap Collective Academia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14421/ref.v23i2.5396

Keywords:

antirealism, ontological commitment, ontological status, philosophy of religion, realism

Abstract

This article starts from the ontological problem in the discourse on the philosophy of religion, namely between the realist and anti-realist poles. The two are differentiated from the way of understanding the world, where realists believe that there is a world that is independent of mind and consciousness (mind-independent world) while anti-realists believe that the world, including perspectives on it, is completely dependent on the intentionality of the subject, so it is only a construction of mind and consciousness. Regarding religion, for realists, religion and its substance truly refer to objective reality, while anti-realists believe that religion is fictitious because it is only a construction of the mind and consciousness, not referring to objective reality. This debate also implies a disagreement between theism and atheism, especially in the context of the ontological status of religion and the epistemic status of religion. This article wants to explain that a believer is definitely a realist. This realist attitude is confirmed through an ontological commitment to the existence of God. However, the semantic construction of divinity is in the domain of mind and consciousness. The object of representation exists in a world independent of the mind, while the content of the representation exists within the influence and determination of the mind. This has consequences for the subject's plurality of meanings of the world. Regarding the theism-atheism dialogue pattern, this article offers a more analytical dialogue pattern, namely dialogue that is not theologically centric. This means that the debate is more directed at how to talk about God, not just about God's existence.

Abstract viewed: 313 times | PDF downloaded = 303 times

References

Baker-Hytch, Max. “Analytic Theology and Analytic Philosophy of Religion: What’s the Difference?” Journal of Analytic Theology 4 (2016). https://doi.org/10.12978/jat.2016-4.120023010007a.

Beckford, James A. Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Butchvarov, Panayot. “Metaphysical Realism and Logical Nonrealism.” The Blackwell Guide to Metaphysics. Wiley Online Books, January 1, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470998984.ch14.

Craig, Edward. “Realism and Antirealism.” Taylor and Francis, March 5, 1998. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780415249126-N049-1.

Cupitt, Don. “About Non-Realism.” Don Cupitt Official Website, 2022. www.doncupitt.com.

Engler, Steven. “Two Problems with Constructionism in the Study of Religion.” Revista de Estudos Da Religião 4 (2005).

———. “Two Problems with Constructionism in the Study of Religion.” Revista de Estudos Da Religião 4 (2005).

Hanna, Patricia, and Bernard Harrison. “Referential Realism.” In Word and World: Practice and the Foundations of Language, edited by Bernard Harrison and Patricia Hanna, 26–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616549.004.

———. “Referential Realism.” In Word and World: Practice and the Foundations of Language, edited by Bernard Harrison and Patricia Hanna, 26–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511616549.004.

Hukmi, Risalatul. The Ontological Status of Religion and Its Significance for Religious Freedom. Yogyakarta: Antinomi Press, 2021.

———. The Ontological Status of Religion and Its Significance for Religious Freedom. Yogyakarta: Antinomi Press, 2021.

Kaden, Tom, and Thomas Schmidt-Lux. “Scientism and Atheism Then and Now: The Role of Science in the Monist and New Atheist Writings.” Culture and Religion 17, no. 1 (January 2, 2016): 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/14755610.2016.1160944.

Kaufman, Whitley. “New Atheism and Its Critics.” Philosophy Compass 14, no. 1 (January 1, 2019): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12560.

Kettell, Steven. “What’s Really New about New Atheism?” Palgrave Communications 2, no. 1 (2016): 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.99.

Khlentzos, Drew. “Challenges to Metaphysical Realism.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/realism-sem-challenge/.

Maulana, Moh. Gema. “Dari Realisme Saintifik Ke Realisme Struktural Ontik.” Jurnal Cogito 6, no. 1 (2021): 31–48.

Moore, Andrew. “Theological Realism and the Observability of God.” International Journal of Semantic Theology 2, no. 1 (2000): 79–99.

Nolt, John. “An Argument for Metaphysical Realism.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 35 (2004): 71–90.

Peter Byrne. Prolegomena to Religious Pluralism: Reference and Realism in Religion. New York: ST. MARTIN’S PRESS, INC., 2004.

Richard King. “The Copernican Turn in the Study of Religion.” In Religion, Theory, Critique: Classic and Contemporary Approaches and Methodologies . New York: Columbia University Press, 2017.

———. “The Copernican Turn in the Study of Religion.” In Religion, Theory, Critique: Classic and Contemporary Approaches and Methodologies. New York: Columbia University Press, 2017.

Schilbrack, Kevin. “Religions: Are There Any?” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 78, no. 4 (December 1, 2010): 1112–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfq086.

Scott, Michael, and Andrew Moore. “Can Theological Realism Be Refuted?” Religious Studies 33, no. 4 (1997).

Taliaferro, Charles. “Philosophy of Religion.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2007.

Torre, Michael D. “What Is the Philosophy of Religion?: A Thomistic Account.” Religions, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14020253.

Versnel, H.S. “ONE GOD:” In Coping With the Gods, 239–305. Wayward Readings in Greek Theology. Brill, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctt1w76x2s.7.

WALKER, RUTH. “RESCUING RELIGIOUS NON-REALISM FROM CUPITT.” The Heythrop Journal 47, no. 3 (July 1, 2006): 426–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2006.00294.x.

Wendy Brown. Edgework: Critical Essays on Knowledge and Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.

Wilmot, Brett. “God and the Problem of Evil: An Attempt at Reframing the Debate.” Religions, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12030218.

Wójcicki, Ryszard. “Referential Semantics BT - Knowledge Contributors.” edited by Vincent F Hendricks, Klaus Frovin Jørgensen, and Stig Andur Pedersen, 185–98. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1001-6_8.

Downloads

Published

2024-05-28