PLURALISME DIANTARA MONISME RAS DI INDONESIA
(STUDI LITERASI ONLINE PENGRUSAKAN DAN PELARANGAN IBADAH UMAT KRISTEN)
Keywords:
Monism, Pluralism, Disharmony, IntoleranceAbstract
The debate between monism and pluralism does not mean that they are diametrically opposed: absolute monistic moral essences (such as "benevolence") can manifest in various specific moral phenomena in different contexts and cultures, such as justice and caring. However, whatever the situation, the goal is to adhere to the moral value of "benevolence." Therefore, from the perspective of traditional Chinese thought, we can tolerate both "one" and "many" in the moral dimension. Monism and pluralism are efforts made by individuals or communities to strengthen the values of Pancasila and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika as the foundation for building national unity. They are not the opposite, as they can lead to national disintegration, disharmony, or intolerance. Monism emphasizes the simplicity of moral construction and the precision of measurement, while pluralism emphasizes understanding the nature of morality among people from different cultures. Both are different theoretical constructs and approaches to the nature of morality. Fanaticism doesn't always lead to differences, but rather to a better understanding of others beyond oneself. Fanaticism allows individuals to better understand themselves and others within the framework of togetherness within diversity with critical discourse analysis method.
References
Amsal Bakhtiar. (2004). Filsafat Ilmu, Jakarta, PT. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Betrand Russel. (2007). History of Western Philosophy, London, Unwin University Books.
Buchtel, E. E., Guan, Y., Peng, Q., Su, Y., Sang, B., Chen, S. X., & Bond, M. H. (2015). Immorality East and West: Are immoral behaviors especially harmful, or especially uncivilized? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(10), 1382−1394.
Euaggelion Christian Kiling (et.al). Tindak Pidana Perusakan Barang yang Bersifat Memberatkan. Jurnal Lex Crimen, Vol. IX, No. 4, 2020;
Franz Magnis Suseno. (2013). Filsafat Sebagai Ilmu Kritis, Cetakan ke-14, Yogyakarta, Kanisius.
Gerald O‟ Collins dan Edward G. Farrugia, Kamus Teologi, Penerbit Kanisius, Yogyakarta, 1996, h. 257.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion (p. 123). New York: Pantheon Books.
James D. Thompson 2003 Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. Front Cover. Transaction Publishers
Kohlerberg 1969, Stages and Sequence: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Socialization
M Legenhausen, Pluralitas dan Pluralisme Agama Keniscayaan Pluralitas Agama sebagai Fakta Sejarah Dan Kerancuan Konsep Pluralisme Agama Dalam Liberalisme, Terj. Arif Mulyadi dan Ana Farida, PT. Lentera Basritama, Jakarta, 2010, h. 10.
Moh. Shofan, Pluralisme Menyelamatkan Agam-agama, Samudra Biru, Yogyakarta, 2011, h. 48.
Mohamed Fathi Osman, Islam, Pluralisme & Toleransi Keagamaan Pandangan al-Qur’an, Kemanusiaan, Sejarah, dan Peradaban, Terj. Irfan Abubakar, PSIK Universitas Paramadina, Jakarta, 2006, h. 3.
Muhammad Hatta, Alam Pikiran Junani, Jilid I (Cet. ke-8; Jakarta: Tintamas, 1966), h.7
R. Soesilo. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) Serta Komentar- komentarnya Lengkap Pasal Demi Pasal. Bogor: Politeia, 1991;
René Descartes Passions of the Soul Hackett Classics ; Diterjemahkan oleh, S. H. Voss ; Edisi, direvisi ; Penerbit, Hackett Publishing, 1989
S. R. Sianturi. Tindak Pidana di KUHP Berikut Uraiannya. Jakarta: Alumni AHM-PTHM, 1983.
Schein, E, Schein, P. 2017 Organizational culture and leadership The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. California: SAGE). (5th ed)
Syamsul Ma‟arif, Pendidikan Pluralisme Di Indonesia, Logung Pustaka, Yogyakarta, 2005, h. 12.
William Montgomery Watt Fundamentalisme islam dan modernitas ; Penerjemah: Taufik Adnan Amal ; Pengarang, Watt, William Montgomery ;Ed. 1
Zaprulkhan. (2015). Filsafat Ilmu Sebuah Analisis Kontemporer, Jakarta, PT. RajaGrafindo Persada.
