<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN"^^ . "This research stems from concerns about the view that humans have free\r\nwill over themselves. Sam Harris, a contemporary thinker, neuroscientist, and\r\nscientist, firmly states that humans do not have free will as believed by\r\ncompatibilists. The free will that many people consider to exist is an illusion.\r\nInterestingly, Sam Harris uses a neurological approach in criticizing the view of\r\nfree will. Sam Harris's view on the absence of human free will has received crossopinions\r\nfrom great thinkers, especially in America. Views in favor of his\r\nthinking consider Harris's arguments to be quite realistic and scientific in\r\nquestioning the reasons behind human actions. Meanwhile, opposing views state\r\nthat Sam Harris ignores the complexity and uniqueness of human experience, as\r\nwell as the important role of choice and responsibility in life.\r\nThis research is a library research study using the documentation method.\r\nThis means utilizing written sources as the main reference. The primary data\r\nsources in this study use Sam Harris's original books titled, Free Will, The Moral\r\nLandscape: How Science Determine Human Values, Islam and Future Tolerance\"\r\nand Waking up. While secondary sources utilize written references related to Sam\r\nHarris's views on free will. The collected data is then analyzed with a\r\nphilosophical approach using the theories of Determinism and Indeterminism.\r\nThere are three problem formulations proposed in this study. First, What is meant\r\nby the illusion of free will? Second, How does Sam Harris criticize the Illusion of\r\nFree Will? Third, What is the Relevance of Sam Harris's Thought in the discourse\r\nof Modern Islamic Theology?\r\nThe findings of this study are as follows; First, Harris argues that free will\r\nis an illusion. Although humans feel they have choices, their actions are actually\r\ninfluenced by biological factors, environment, and life experiences. Choices that\r\nappear to be free are actually the result of these influences, whether conscious or\r\nnot. Second, Harris falls into the category of hard (extreme) determinism and\r\nneurologically, the idea of free will fails to answer the existence of human free\r\nwill. Human will is actually influenced by neurophysiological processes in the\r\nhuman brain. These neurophysiological brain processes are influenced by many\r\nfactors such as genetics, environment, past memories and others. The idea of\r\ncompatibilism according to Sam Harris fails in psychological-neurological facts.\r\nFor example, the \"Compatibilist\" view which states that neural activity is also part\r\nof human free will is clearly wrong. This is because humans cannot be responsible\r\nfor something that they are not aware of its influence. Saying that humans have\r\nfree will means violating scientific facts in the process of human experience. And\r\nthe perspective on morals must be regulated. According to Sam Harris, humans do\r\nnot have free will, meaning humans are not morally responsible. However,\r\npunishment for crimes still must be carried out, with the reason that the crime\r\ndoes not harm others and not because of their \"free will\". Third, Sam Harris's\r\nthoughts on free will have relevance in the discourse of Modern Islamic theology\r\nsuch as the problem of fatalism in the perspective of Islamic renewal, and also\r\nunderstanding a new paradigm in viewing the problem of human actions in the\r\ncontext of Islamic Theology."^^ . "2024-07-16" . . . . "UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA"^^ . . . "FAKULTAS USHULUDDIN, STUDI AGAMA DAN PEMIKIRAN ISLAM, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA"^^ . . . . . . . . . "NIM.: 22205011010"^^ . "Hariyanto"^^ . "NIM.: 22205011010 Hariyanto"^^ . . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Text)"^^ . . . . . "22205011010_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf"^^ . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Text)"^^ . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . "HTML Summary of #66559 \n\nKRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN\n\n" . "text/html" . . . "297.261 Islam dan Filsafat, Filsafat Islam" . .