%A NIM.: 22205011010 Hariyanto
%O Pembimbing: Dr. Alim Roswantoro. M.Ag
%T KRITIK SAM HARRIS TERHADAP ILUSI KEHENDAK BEBAS DAN RELEVANSINYA DALAM WACANA TEOLOGI ISLAM MODERN
%X This research stems from concerns about the view that humans have free
will over themselves. Sam Harris, a contemporary thinker, neuroscientist, and
scientist, firmly states that humans do not have free will as believed by
compatibilists. The free will that many people consider to exist is an illusion.
Interestingly, Sam Harris uses a neurological approach in criticizing the view of
free will. Sam Harris's view on the absence of human free will has received crossopinions
from great thinkers, especially in America. Views in favor of his
thinking consider Harris's arguments to be quite realistic and scientific in
questioning the reasons behind human actions. Meanwhile, opposing views state
that Sam Harris ignores the complexity and uniqueness of human experience, as
well as the important role of choice and responsibility in life.
This research is a library research study using the documentation method.
This means utilizing written sources as the main reference. The primary data
sources in this study use Sam Harris's original books titled, Free Will, The Moral
Landscape: How Science Determine Human Values, Islam and Future Tolerance"
and Waking up. While secondary sources utilize written references related to Sam
Harris's views on free will. The collected data is then analyzed with a
philosophical approach using the theories of Determinism and Indeterminism.
There are three problem formulations proposed in this study. First, What is meant
by the illusion of free will? Second, How does Sam Harris criticize the Illusion of
Free Will? Third, What is the Relevance of Sam Harris's Thought in the discourse
of Modern Islamic Theology?
The findings of this study are as follows; First, Harris argues that free will
is an illusion. Although humans feel they have choices, their actions are actually
influenced by biological factors, environment, and life experiences. Choices that
appear to be free are actually the result of these influences, whether conscious or
not. Second, Harris falls into the category of hard (extreme) determinism and
neurologically, the idea of free will fails to answer the existence of human free
will. Human will is actually influenced by neurophysiological processes in the
human brain. These neurophysiological brain processes are influenced by many
factors such as genetics, environment, past memories and others. The idea of
compatibilism according to Sam Harris fails in psychological-neurological facts.
For example, the "Compatibilist" view which states that neural activity is also part
of human free will is clearly wrong. This is because humans cannot be responsible
for something that they are not aware of its influence. Saying that humans have
free will means violating scientific facts in the process of human experience. And
the perspective on morals must be regulated. According to Sam Harris, humans do
not have free will, meaning humans are not morally responsible. However,
punishment for crimes still must be carried out, with the reason that the crime
does not harm others and not because of their "free will". Third, Sam Harris's
thoughts on free will have relevance in the discourse of Modern Islamic theology
such as the problem of fatalism in the perspective of Islamic renewal, and also
understanding a new paradigm in viewing the problem of human actions in the
context of Islamic Theology.
%K Kehendak Bebas, Sam Harris, Kritik, Kompatibilisme, Teologi Islam
Modern
%D 2024
%I UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
%L digilib66559