%0 Book
%A Yulia Nasrul Latif, -
%C Yogyakarta
%D 2023
%F digilib:75772
%I Idea Press
%K Nawal al-Sa’dawi, Gender, Teologi
%T Nawal al-Sa’dawi Gender dan Rasionalitas Teologi
%U https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/75772/
%X Fi> Sanah Milyūn is Al-H}aki>m’s projection of the current human   condition into the future. Humans who fully prioritize science and   technology over spiritualistic theology are a direct result of the   knowledge that is based purely on data and logic. We see this happening   now, in fact, the trend in that direction is getting stronger. This is why   the story becomes interesting.  The story reflects the author’s position and his criticism of   positivistic science. In Žižekian language, Al-H}aki>m created a radical   subject (the geologist) who saw a Lack in the oppressive Symbolic   (positivistic scientism) legitimated by the government. The hero then   created a Fantasy (a humanistic and spiritualistic society) and struggled   to approach it.   This does not mean that Al-H}aki>m rejected science itself, but only   its underlying positivistic paradigm. As a solution, he then proposed a   new, more religious paradigm to uphold science and technology. For   example, in the case of the mortality of the human body, no matter how far science has come, man can never surpass God. One can see this in   the “skull discovery” and “fallen meteor” scene.  In Fi> Sanah Milyūn Al-H}aki>m indeed acknowledges the   development of science and technology. However, he also places God,   religion, and revelation above them as the guides of human civilization.   Otherwise, science will only result in the destruction of civilization,   environmental damage, and moral degradation. As described in the   short story; wars that reshaped the Earth’s surface, humans were no   different from inanimate objects, and they became arrogant because of   their temporary immortality.  We know that this religious paradigm is less popular than the   positivistic paradigm. Even so, we must not give up. This paradigm   needs to be echoed to save the future of humanity from destruction on a   global scale. The struggle of the hero in holding on to his belief until the   end, even though he must bear the punishment from the government   and the surrounding community, is the author’s way of showing this.  The need for a new paradigm to underlie science resonates not   only in the East but also in the West. Several ideas have recently been   voiced in persistent criticism of positivistic science. For example, as   proposed by Fayerabend. Science must not have a monopoly on the   truth because the authority of science in modern times is determined   solely based on propaganda, through industry, technology, and   scientific institutions. Science and religion have the same rights in   interpreting the world in a free society.