{"title":"The Morphogenesis of the Discourses of Religious Radicalism in Post-Authoritarian Indonesia","authors":"S. Yudha","doi":"10.7454/MJS.V24I2.10813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ambiguitas konsepsi menyebabkan eksplanasi mengenai gejala radikalisme keagamaan di tingkat global bersifat interpretatif sesuai dengan konteks dan makna yang diberikan oleh kalangan intelektual. Wajar pengetahuan mengenai hal ini tumpang tindih dengan konsepsi lain seperti kebangkitan keagamaan, fundamentalisme, ekstremisme, militansi, terorisme, hingga jihad. Sejalan dengan gagasan tersebut, pengetahuan mengenai diskursus radikalisme keagamaan pascaotoritarian Indonesia diproduksi oleh institusi yang memiliki otoritas sekaligus motif untuk melakukan interpretasi sesuai dengan struktur pengetahuan yang dikembangkan para pendahulunya. Institusi tersebut, baik institusi negara maupun masyarakat sipil, mengonstruksi diskursus radikalisme dengan penjelasan deskriptif sehingga menghasilkan gagasan pengetahuan yang bersifat reproduktif alih-alih elaboratif-transformatif. Pendapat tersebut ada benarnya, namun pada praktiknya perlu penambahan kerangka yang lebih komprehensif dalam menjelaskan radikalisme guna mengantisipasi dampak yang ditimbulkan. Penulis berargumen bahwa konstruksi pengetahuan mengenai diskursus radikalisme harus ditempatkan dalam kerangka morfogenesis di mana terdapat elaborasi dan transformasi proses reproduksi pengetahuan secara struktural guna menghasilkan khasanah pengetahuan baru yang bersifat prediktif. Pemetaan dan konstruksi radikalisme dilakukan berdasarkan produk (hasil) sekaligus pembuat produk (agen-agen) yang membentuk struktur pengetahuan yang dapat dijadikan mitigasi sekaligus peringatan dini untuk mengontrol radikalisme. The ambiguity of conception results in the explanation of the symptoms of religious radicalism at the global level becoming interpretative, depending on the contexts and meanings given by intellectuals. It becomes natural that knowledge of the conception overlaps with others, such as religious revivalism, fundamentalism, extremism, militancy, terrorism, and jihad. In line with the idea, knowledge on the discourses of religious radicalism in post-authoritarian Indonesia has been produced by institutions having the authorities and motives to make interpretations, according to the knowledge structure developed by their predecessors. These institutions, both state and civil society, construct the discourses of radicalism with descriptive explanations, to produce reproductive ideas rather than elaborative-transformative knowledge. The aforementioned opinion is true, but in practice, it is necessary to add a more comprehensive framework in explaining radicalism to anticipate its impacts. This article argues that the construction of knowledge on the discourses of radicalism must be placed within the framework of morphogenesis, where there are an elaboration and a transformation of the process of knowledge reproduction structurally, to produce a repertoire of new knowledge that is predictive. Mapping and construction of radicalism have been carried out based on products (results) as well as product makers (agencies) that form knowledge structures that can be used to mitigate as well as to provide early warning to control radicalism.","PeriodicalId":31129,"journal":{"name":"Masyarakat Jurnal Sosiologi","volume":"1 1","pages":"167-186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masyarakat Jurnal Sosiologi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7454/MJS.V24I2.10813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Ambiguitas konsepsi menyebabkan eksplanasi mengenai gejala radikalisme keagamaan di tingkat global bersifat interpretatif sesuai dengan konteks dan makna yang diberikan oleh kalangan intelektual. Wajar pengetahuan mengenai hal ini tumpang tindih dengan konsepsi lain seperti kebangkitan keagamaan, fundamentalisme, ekstremisme, militansi, terorisme, hingga jihad. Sejalan dengan gagasan tersebut, pengetahuan mengenai diskursus radikalisme keagamaan pascaotoritarian Indonesia diproduksi oleh institusi yang memiliki otoritas sekaligus motif untuk melakukan interpretasi sesuai dengan struktur pengetahuan yang dikembangkan para pendahulunya. Institusi tersebut, baik institusi negara maupun masyarakat sipil, mengonstruksi diskursus radikalisme dengan penjelasan deskriptif sehingga menghasilkan gagasan pengetahuan yang bersifat reproduktif alih-alih elaboratif-transformatif. Pendapat tersebut ada benarnya, namun pada praktiknya perlu penambahan kerangka yang lebih komprehensif dalam menjelaskan radikalisme guna mengantisipasi dampak yang ditimbulkan. Penulis berargumen bahwa konstruksi pengetahuan mengenai diskursus radikalisme harus ditempatkan dalam kerangka morfogenesis di mana terdapat elaborasi dan transformasi proses reproduksi pengetahuan secara struktural guna menghasilkan khasanah pengetahuan baru yang bersifat prediktif. Pemetaan dan konstruksi radikalisme dilakukan berdasarkan produk (hasil) sekaligus pembuat produk (agen-agen) yang membentuk struktur pengetahuan yang dapat dijadikan mitigasi sekaligus peringatan dini untuk mengontrol radikalisme. The ambiguity of conception results in the explanation of the symptoms of religious radicalism at the global level becoming interpretative, depending on the contexts and meanings given by intellectuals. It becomes natural that knowledge of the conception overlaps with others, such as religious revivalism, fundamentalism, extremism, militancy, terrorism, and jihad. In line with the idea, knowledge on the discourses of religious radicalism in post-authoritarian Indonesia has been produced by institutions having the authorities and motives to make interpretations, according to the knowledge structure developed by their predecessors. These institutions, both state and civil society, construct the discourses of radicalism with descriptive explanations, to produce reproductive ideas rather than elaborative-transformative knowledge. The aforementioned opinion is true, but in practice, it is necessary to add a more comprehensive framework in explaining radicalism to anticipate its impacts. This article argues that the construction of knowledge on the discourses of radicalism must be placed within the framework of morphogenesis, where there are an elaboration and a transformation of the process of knowledge reproduction structurally, to produce a repertoire of new knowledge that is predictive. Mapping and construction of radicalism have been carried out based on products (results) as well as product makers (agencies) that form knowledge structures that can be used to mitigate as well as to provide early warning to control radicalism.