IDENTITAS AGAMA, RUANG PUBLIK DAN POST-SEKULARISME: PERSPEKTIF DISKURSUS JURGEN HABERMAS

Authors

  • Irfan Noor

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18592/jiu.v11i1.733

Keywords:

identitas agama, diskursus, postsekularisme, ruang publik

Abstract

The politic of identity based on religion is still a major issue of Indonesian nationality.
One such issue is the validity of a religious group’s involvement in the national public
policy in Indonesia.In this context, the theory of Jurgen Habermas’s discourse and its
relation to his view of post-secularism was very relevant to discuss. For Habermas, the
neutrality of the public sphere does not mean that a vacuum of religion. In the name of
democracy, religious positions should be placed in parallel with the formation of other
political opinions and aspirations. Functional differentiation in modern society leading
to the individualization of religion does not necessarily imply loss of influence and
relevance of religion in the public sphere. Nevertheless, of course, the involvement of
religion in the public sphere still has limits, that the religious language of particular
religion must be “translated” into the language first that being accepted by the public,
which has ‘epistemic status’ that can be accepted by the other residents. Such alignment
is called ‘postsekular’ people, where every citizen has the right faith with the bond of
communication with each other.

References

Franki Budi Hardiman, “Demokrasi Deliberatif: Model untuk Indonesia

Pasca-Soeharto?”, dalam Basis, no. 11-12, Nov-Des 2004.

——, “Teori Diskursus Dan Demokrasi: Peralihan Habermas ke dalam

Filsafat Politik”, dalam DISKURSUS, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2OO8.

——, Demokrasi Deliberatif: Menimbang Negara Hukum’ dan ‘Ruang Publik’

dalam Teori Diskursus Jurgen Habermas, (Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 2009).

George Ritzer, Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots, (Boston:

The Basics, McGraw Hill, 2003).

Giancarlo Bosetti (ed.), Iman Melawan Nalar: Perdebatan Joseph Ratzinger

melawan Jürgen Habermas, (Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 2009).

Jamhari dan Jajang Jahroni, Gerakan Salafi Radikal di Indonesia, (Jakarta:

Rajawali Press, 2004).

Jeffley K. Hadden, “Desacralizing Secularization Theory”, dalam Jeffiey

K. Hadden dan Anson Shupe (eds.), Religion and Political Order vol.

III: Secularization and Fundamentalism Reconsidered, (New York: Paragon

House, 1989).

José Casanova, “Secularization Revisited: A Reply to Talal Asad”, dalam

David Scott dau Charles Hirsehkind (eds.). Powers of the Secular Modern:

Talal Asad and His Interlocutors, Stanford, (California: Stanford

University Press, 2006).

Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: an Inquiry

into a Category qf Bourgeois Society, (Cambridge MIT Prees, 1991)

——, The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. I: Reason and the Rationalization

of Society, T. McCarthy (trans.). (Boston: Beacon, 1984).

——, The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. II: Lifeworld and System, T.

McCarthy (trans.). (Boston: Beacon, 1987).

——, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and

Democracy, W. Rehg (trans.). (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996).

Jurgen Habermas dan Joseph Ratzinger, The Dialectics of Secularization: On

Reason and Religion, disunting oleh Florian Schuller, (San Francisco:

Ignatius Press, 2006).

Michael J. Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, (Cambridge University

Press 1982).

Nurrohman dan Marzuki Wahid, “Politik Formalisasi Syari’at Islam dan

Fundamentalisme”, dalam Jurnal Istiqro’, Vol. 01, No. 01, 2002.

Paul Budi Kleden dan Adrianus Sunarko (eds.), Dialektika Sekularisasi:

Diskusi Habermas – Ratzinger dan Tanggapan, (Yogyakarta: Lamalera

dan Ledalero, 2010).

Downloads

Published

2016-03-07