Archives - Page 2

  • Vol. 26 No. 1 (2010)

    Editorial:

    Sounds, songs, images, ‘image’, and moving pictures, when creating space and filling up time will unleash the hidden verve of imagination. Not only to the mystics and those who have their own religion, these ‘imagerial’ realities always bring necessary interruptions to the most non-spiritual people on earth. Our senses are no more of a lesser degree for any philosophical discourse. In truth, discourses are always a communal act involving people of very different angles but, frightfully, of mostly the same space and time. This is no more an age to decry what we see and hear and touch as something we can ‘under-stand’. Perhaps the most challenging attitude in our time is to share those standings in every possible community and connectedness.

    “Expert language is a prison for knowledge and understanding. A prison for intellectually significant relationships. It is time to move beyond the institutional practices of triviledge, toward networks and surfaces, toward the play of superficiality, toward interstanding” (Mark C. Taylor and Esa Saarinen, 1994). Thus we learn that our standing will have to be shared and told so as to cross the borders created by art, religion, mysticism, and even theology. This issue of Melintas brings you toward the borders by presenting the discourses over musician Carlos Santana, religion and cinema, images of the church and Christian imagination, mysticism without bounds in vachana songs, and Krisna Murti’s video artworks. We might find out that these are the world’s imagerial realities that even if we do not (want to) understand, we still are summoned to interstand them. Knowledge becomes an interstanding only when imagination is at work.

    Communicating is positioning. Probably the most troubling restlessness of human beings is the hope for not being alone. And that is the very reason for them to be ‘in position’ among the others. Undoubtedly we cannot position ourselves without the presence of the others. We constantly want to be acquainted with where we are now. Therefore, a small spot of indifference is another forewarning light for us. Without going too much in contrasting the position of one or another, we always need others in the course of positioning or telling our standings and getting their responds appropriately. When we don’t get the appropriate responds, perhaps that's the time we sense that we don’t know where we are exactly.

    At the end of the day, there is yet a circular path we all are by now familiar, that is, the epistemological circle from appearance to experience, and from experience back to appearance. We wish our readers a pleasant journey to the borders but don’t forget to come back home to day-to-day communal realities bringing fresh insights to share again and again.

    Editor.
  • Vol. 25 No. 3 (2009)

    Editorial:

    One of the most problematic issues today is the concept of  “self ”. The history of modern philosophy  has always been struggling between the ambition of  comprehending the objective reality of the universe ‘out there’ and  its indispensable anthropocentric bias ‘in here’. Indeed Western modern philosophy had been characterised by the primacy of the self as the rational  “subject”.  However, at the end of the twentieth century the disourse ended up just in the contrary :  in the “death of the subject” and in “the end of the self”. Philosophers seemed to have been aware more and more  that  reality is resistant to the human totalising system, and even worse, that the self itself is but the function of  the operation of  the very  systems, systems of discourse in particular.

    Nevertheless,  what is often overlapping in such “death-of-the subject” discourse is the’identity’ and the ‘agency’ of the subject.  One is not to be confused with the other. The former might be the product of systems, the latter remains –to some extent- the producer. Melintas of this issue revisits again the concept of the ‘self’ in terms of its agency, personal history, virtual non-spatial product, capitalistic greed, genetic engineering and filmic image creation.

    Editor.

  • Vol. 25 No. 2 (2009)

    Editorial:

    ‘Faith’ in fact is such a strange word today, let alone ‘religious faith’.  Strange, since despite its ubiquity,  the word seems to have lost its vigour and credence. Perhaps this is on the one hand due to the violent excesses of  religious faith, and on the other, related to the pretension of modern scientific rationality to be neutral -as if it has nothing to do with any sort of faith whatsoever.

    Faith -in its broad sense-, however, is inevitable. The foundation of any kind of expalanatory system cannot be other than a certain kind of faith, a faith in something. This faith or the basic belief may be called ‘postulate’, ‘presopposition’ or  even ‘rationality’  (an ultimate believe in the power of reason). In the predominance of modern scientific knowledge,  the faith in reason is indeed the most basic.  To this extent even religious faith is to be justified and rethought  again and again in terms of  reason.

    Melintas of this issue discusses  the position of Christianity as a particular kind of faith in the changing circumstances,  the position of  faith in general within the framework of  rationality, the faith in the authenticity of the revelatory truth, and finally the faith in personal as well as collective memory  within the course of history.

    Last but not least, there is an important practical note concerning Melintas of the previous issue. We sincerely regret an omission in the previous issue: we did not mention that Henk Oosterling’s essay “Dasein as Design, Or: Must Design Save the World” (Volume 24, no.1, April 2009) was made available to us by Premsela. Dutch Philosopher Henk Oosterling gave a public lecture titled “Dasein as Design,” and Premsela organized this lecture at 1 April 2009. Premsela is a Dutch platform for design and fashion (www.premsela.org). Laura Martz has translated Oosterling’s essay and Premsela gave Melintas permission to publish this essay. Hereby we offer our sincere apology to Premsela for the omission.

    E d i t o r

  • Vol. 25 No. 1 (2009)

    Editorial:

    The cacophony of change and restructuring in almost every area of life today has made us realize more and more the contingency of human 'design': the precariousness of human cultural world. Cultural
    boundaries keep shifting; virtual reality overlaps the actual; the present reconfigures the past; technology shapes more and more our intimate lives,
    etc.


    Indeed our conventional frameworks are no more sufficient for understanding the rapid change and the overlapping territories. Most of the articles in MELINTAS of this issue talk about the shifting paradigm. Humans as 'Dasein' is viewed as designing-animal, so to say, that the whole
    cultural paradigm-shift can also be seen as sort of re-designing our human world. Technoculture also forces us to redefine the so called 'reality' in our
    'Lebenswelt'. Technology is becoming more and more a decisive part of our perception. Even our perception of ourselves vis-à-vis strangers is not as clear and definite as it used to be. There is stranger or 'the other' even within ourselves. Hence a new way of conceiving 'boundaries', if at all, while being
    more alert to see them as networks of flows.

    Editor.

  • Vol. 24 No. 3 (2008)

    Editorial:

    In the age of transition from modern to postmodern paradigm  today, the intersection between science, culture and religion  is  crucial. Lots of criticism have been leveled  at science, be it in terms of  ideology, epistemology or methodology. Notwithstanding the criticism, however, science is by no means passé. Along with technology as its material embodiment science in fact retains, and justifies, its central position in today’s human world.  The problem is just that -as the consequence of  the criticism- science should  take into account  different forms of life or different  epistemic possibilities offered by  other kinds of knowledge rooted in various cultures.  This, in turn, requires a discreet analysis on the possible interconnection between science and cultural epistemology. 

    That said, the so called ‘culture’ is itself problematic. In most cases culture is inseparable from religion  as its  source.  It is also the resurgence of religion that, among other factors,  has raised up the sensitivity to cultural issues these days. Thus epistemological problems refers ultimately also to the position of  religion as the source of knowledge and value orientation. Melintas of this issue discusses  the complexity of the interconnection between science, knowledge, culture and religion.

    Editor.

  • Vol. 24 No. 2 (2008)

    Editorial:

    Today a city comprises the complexity and the ambiguity of human tendencies. If in terms of physical environment and institutions  cities are now undergoing rapid transformation, so are human selves and their ways of looking at things. Various sentrifugal tendencies are in contestation with sentripetal instincts.  This is palpable especially in certain areas such as sexuality, problems of gender, religion, culture and literature. In developing countries like Indonesia,  for example,   sexuality and gender are quite susceptible to political manipulations,  particularly when they are connected to religious  affair.  In  the realm of religion itself the dilemma  oftentimes occurs around the problem of stereotyping, namely  between the stereotype of the so called ‘fundamentalism’ on the one hand  and  of the  ‘secular’ modern tendencies on the other. And when it comes to  culture, the problem is, among other things, on the way ‘tradition’ is to be conceived of : for instance whether it is purely repetitive or transformative.  But urban life is also characterised by the  burgeoning of  its literature, which is one of the most intimate outlets of  its inner struggle, concerning what is considered good and evil in particular. Melintas of this issue  puts all these into perspective.   

    Editor.

  • Vol. 24 No. 1 (2008)

    Editorial:

    In an age characterized by transgression of boundaries nowadays, where culture seems to lose its distinctive territory, and any kind of systemic compartmentalization seems to implode, humans are compelled to redefine their concept of  civilization, and rethink what today being civilized is supposed to mean. Yet , as soon as they do it they have to elaborate the indispensable fact of differences and even dichotomies - internal as well as external- such as : mind and body, individual conscience and social interests,  the one and the many, male and female, private and public, politician and poet, etc.   The emphasis on either side of the dichotomies will generate different concept and standard of  civilization. In techno-scientific culture, for instance, body or matter prevailed over mind. Hence the predominance of material culture in modern  life. The prevalent bias of male chauvinism or patriarchy in the conventional concept of civilization has resulted in the marginalization of women, hence problematic. Problems of  democracy in many countries oftentimes have a lot to do with  the difficulties in  regulating  the distinction between private conscience and public interests,  political rhetorics and artistic sensibility to capture  concrete reality. The list of examples can surely be longer. The problem, however, is that, while binary oppositions are the basic means by which to conceive  reality or to make reality intelligible, this does not necessarily mean that the abovementioned dichotomies are irreconcilable.  MELINTAS of this issue discusses the tacit layers behind, and the complexity of, the dichotomies.

    Editor.
  • Vol. 23 No. 3 (2007)

    Editorial:

    Does existence requires border ? This question seems to be the centre of gravity today. We are witnessing a paradox nowadays, namely,  while the world is getting more and more borderless, the ubiquitous  reflex reaction, more often than not, is precisely the other way round : fortification of  border, as if  every territory is now under the menace of invasion. On the other hand,  if existence is by nature an endless interaction, it would mean a never-ending process of criss-crossing the borders, an on-going  mutual translation among diverse frames of meaning. This, however, would entail instability and volatility of identity. The key, perhaps, is that identity is to be seen not as ossification of particular patterns of  behavior, but instead, a living network of interactions, something amounts to an unfulfilled desire. Border, then  is not so much a limiting boundary as an opening towards ever new horizons and possibilities. In this process, consequently, authenticity needs to be redefined. How is authenticity related to the particularity of culture and experience ? how is it related to the practice of  colonization with the risk that one is given name by others, often unfairly ? But the problem of border and identity goes even further, to the realm of metaphysics and theology: how can we name the unnameable  and the ineffable? Melintas of this issue discussing these problems from various angles.

    Editor.

  • Vol. 23 No. 2 (2007)

    Editorial:

    The resurgence of religion, although to some extent may be a blessing and even a sort of solution to the spiritual problems of the new millennium, more often than not is itself   problematic. The institutional and communal traits of religions, their claims to being the possessors of  the truth, their other-worldly character, the difficulty of religions to cope with pluralism, among other things, epitomize the causes of serious problems today. While ad intra these things are becoming more and more subject to different interpretations, hence debatable,  ad extra  they are problematic in terms of their relations with other religions, cultures, technology , morality, and environment. It seems that changes in the way we perceive the basic elements of religion are inevitable. Religions have to change their ways of looking at themselves and at others, as well as to reformulate their viewpoints on truth, morality, technology and environment. Melintas of this issue discusses some of these current problems.

    Editor.

  • Vol. 23 No. 1 (2007)

    Editorial:

    A world without border, without walls, how imaginable is it? Infinity or borderlessness, is always intriguing, and even more so now. It is intriguing probably due to its ambivalent nature: borderlessness shows the allure of freedom, yet also the menace of uncertainty and formlessness. Human civilizations over the ages have been animated by this ambivalence, that is, by both the dream of breaking through the limit and the fear of the unlimited; by the centrifugal force towards the universal and by the centripetal interest of keeping the particular order. Today such tension applies to almost every dimension of human life. In politics this touches the problem of state : how is 'state' to be conceived of today, in the face of increasing immigrants or refugees and the tendency of regional unifications? How far the 'border' is to be open ? In developing-societies this may mean the border between the dignity of human individual and the importance of community. In the realm of culture it appears in the ambiguity of the so called 'identity'. In religion the monotheistic religions in particular- this can mean the uncertainty of attitude towards the'other', or problem of the peculiarity of religious language. In the world of science and modern rationality the tension would concern, among other things, the problem of the validity of other faculties such as intuition or imagination. Melintas of this issue addresses precisely the complexity of these tensional borders

    Editor.

  • Vol. 22 No. 3 (2006)

    Editorial:

    Reformasi di Indonesia telah mengakibatkan banyak hal dibongkar kembali dan dikaji ulang. “Dekonstruksi” menjadi kata kunci. Dekonstruksi memang berarti membongkar, tapi bisa juga itu kita lihat sebagai upaya untuk mencari kemungkinan-kemungkinan baru untuk memahami kompleksitas persoalan dan kenyataan. Bagaimana pun sebuah sistem selalu menyimpan banyak kemungkinan yang kerap tak langsung terlihat.  Hanya setelah dibongkar dan dikaji ulang ia menampilkan kemungkinan-kemungkinan yang barunya.

    Melintas kali ini menghadirkan banyak bahasan tentang situasi politik Indonesia. Karenanya mau tidak mau artikel-artikel tersebut menyerempet wilayah empiris.  Sajian awal adalah pemahaman tentang dekonstruksi dari Konrad Kebung bertajuk “Repositioning Derrida's Deconstruction”  yang hendak melihat kembali seberapa berharga sebetulnya gagasan dekonstruksi itu , terutama setelah mendapat berbagai kritik atasnya. Itu lantas disusul dengan tulisan Aleksius Djemadu , “The Primacy of the state in the study of global politics: an epistemological debate”, yang mempersoalkan sejauh mana negara masih dapat berperan dalam situasi global yang dikendalikan oleh perusahaan-perusahaan multinasional serta dikontrol oleh  gerakan-gerakan masyarakat madani dan berbagai LSM. Penulis lain, Roy Voragen, menjumput sisi lebih spesifik, yakni korelasi antara peran masyarakat madani dan terbentuknya budaya demokrasi. Artikelnya berjudul “Civil Society and Democracy in post-Soeharto Indonesia”.  Ada pun Banyu Perwita menyasar sisi lebih spesifik lagi dan mengkaji politik simbol dalam gerakan-gerakan Islam di Indonesia. Artikelnya adalah “ Islam 'symbolic politics' in Indonesia”. Donny Gahral Adian melengkapi kajian tentang Islam ini dengan artikel “Javanese-Islam Value Consensus” yang hendak memperlihatkan bahwa dalam sejarahnya dan pada dasarnya Islam tidak bertentangan dengan kebutuhan ke arah konsensus nilai dalam konteks pluralisme . Akhirnya Leo Samosir, lewat artikel “Kristianitas dalam tegangan antara Tradisi dan Relevansi” pun bicara soal tegangan dialektis agama sebagai institusi dan  agama sebagai  inspirasi. Selamat membaca!

    Redaksi

  • Vol. 22 No. 2 (2006)

    Editorial:

    “Formasi subyek”, itulah salah satu perbincangan pelik dalam filsafat mutakhir. Subyek individu di satu pihak dilihat sebagai produk bentukan kekuatan-kekuatan eksternal, di pihak lain ia tetaplah produser kekuatan-kekuatan  dan membentuk dirinya sendiri pula. Wacana pascamodern kadang agak berlebihan dalam melihat faktor eksternal, hingga seolah subyek individu nyaris tak punya peran berarti dalam membentuk diri dan dunia sekelilingnya. Subyek manusia “sudah mati” kata kaum poststrukturalis.

    Dalam suasana wacana macam itu menariklah merenungi kembali posisi subyek itu dari berbagi sudutnya. Dalam sajian kami kali ini Preciosa de Joya dengan artikelnya “ The Task of Remembrance” melihat posisi individu dengan beban sejarah masa lampaunya dan tugas bagi masa depannya. Masa lampau, terutama yang tak adil, harus dilihat sebagai bagian dari proyek hidup individu, yang belum selesai, dan mesti dibenahi menuju masa depan yang lebih baik. El Mithra Delacruz dengan artikelnya “The Individual and Collective transformation”, memperkarakan  kemungkinan bagaimana kebudayaan, kendati menentukan kehidupan individu, juga ditentukan oleh individu.  Kualitas peradaban suatu kebudayaan pada sisi tertentu juga ditentukan oleh petualangan batin individunya. Berikutnya artikel tulisan Atmo “Zizek's redefinition of Modern Subject” lebih eksplisit mencoba merumuskan dan membangunkan kembali posisi subyek Cartesian -yang  telah terlampau lama dikritik dan ditumbangkan itu- melalui alur pikir Slavoj Zizek . Sedangkan tulisan Jason Osai, “In His Image and Likeness, ponderings over Creation and the Divine” menawarkan semacam kosmologi yang agak baru , yang mengedepankan kemungkinan bahwa bangsa manusia tidak langsung diciptakan oleh Tuhan yang omnipoten dan immortal, melainkan oleh entitas yang juga mortal namun lebih tinggi kemampuan mentalnya. Ini dengan sendirinya mengimplikasikan  cara pandang baru juga atas subyek individu.  Sementara itu Tulus Sudarto, lewat artikel teologinya “ Teologi Magisterium dan konservatisme Gereja” membahas dilemma akibat tendensi konservatisme gereja, yang pada gilirannya mudah berbenturan dengan kreativitas dan petualangan batin individu juga.  Selamat membaca!

    Redaksi

  • Vol. 22 No. 1 (2006)

    Editorial:

    Relasi sosial, itulah salah satu tema krusial hari ini. Hal yang tampak demikian  mudah dan sudah selalu berjalan dalam kehidupan sehari-hari itu, kini sesungguhnya merupakan bagian hidup yang paling bermasalah. Tanyakan saja pada guru Bimbingan dan Penyuluhan di sekolah, para pastor di tempat retret atau paroki, para psikolog, atau pun segala jenis tabloid gossip, mereka semua adalah saksi betapa kini hubungan antar manusia adalah sesuatu yang tidak mudah.

    Ketika manusia mulai mengandalkan hubungan sosial untuk mengatasi masalah  di luar dirinya, sejak  itu pada saat yang sama manusia mulai terperangkap dalam masalah intern dunianya sendiri yang justru lebih besar. Namun di sisi lain hubungan sosial itu pula yang akhirnya melahirkan peradaban yang unik dan membawa manusia ke tingkat evolusi lebih tinggi. Kali ini MELINTAS mengangkat Hubungan sosial yang mengandung banyak ambivalensi ini.

    Sajian awal adalah artikel dari seorang filsuf realis Peter Mc.Cormick, “Friendship's Unrequited Loves” yang  dengan rinci membahas valensi etis dan moral persahabatan sejati berdasarkan kasus persahabatan Sokrates dan Alcibiades dalam dialog Symposium Plato.  Setelah itu, dari tingkat personal kita melangkah ke tingkat  hubungan publik. Dan untuk itu Rudiyanto Subagio menyuguhkan artikel “The Role of Public Space in Building Humanity”, yang  membahas hubungan manusia yang transformatif dalam dunia urban, sejak hubungan spontan personal, institusional, kosmikal hingga spiritual. Ini lantas disusul dengan tulisan Bob Sugeng Hadiwinata, “Bourdieu, Neo-Liberalisme, Intelektual dan Gerakan Sosial Global”  yang membetot hubungan manusia ke tingkat global, dan lewat analisisnya atas pemikiran Bourdieu , mengajukan kritik mendasar atas paradigma Neo-Liberalisme. Dari sana kita memasuki ranah Teologi. Peter Aman mengawalinya dengan melacak dasar-dasar keterlibatan Gereja dalam urusan-urusan sosial-kemasyarakatan. Itu dapat anda baca dalam artikelnya “ Moral Kristiani dan keprihatinan Sosial”.  Sementara Madya Utama mempersoalkan kedudukan kaum awam yang perlu dilihat kembali. Artikelnya bertajuk “ Klerus, Religius dan Awam dalam terang Konsili Vatikan II dan Sesudahnya”. Sedang Basilius Redan Werang menarik isu awam itu ke tingkat lebih konkrit dan operasional. Tulisannya “Pengangkatan Kanonis Katekis Awam sebagai Administrator Paroki”  mencari pendasaran yuridis atas keterlibatan awam dalam aktivitas Gerejani lebih jauh lagi.
    Selamat membaca !

    Redaksi

  • Vol. 21 No. 2 (2005)

    Editorial:

    Melintas kini berubah wajah dan beberapa hal dalam struktur bagian dalamnya, semata-mata dalam rangka menyesuaikan diri dengan perkembangan mutakhirnya, yang penyebaran maupun para kontributornya ternyata semakin menuju skala internasional. Namun  jurnal ini tetaplah bersifat dwi-bahasa, berhubung  kepentingan awal untuk menampung pemikiran-pemikiran lokal juga  tetap kami pertahankan.

    Kali ini Melintas menyuguhkan berbagai artikel yang umumnya memperbincangkan ihwal bagaimana kini religi dan transendensi umumnya mesti dipahami dalam kecamuk situasi mutakhir dengan segala persoalannya. Teolog kondang Robert Schreiter kami ketengahkan dengan artikelnya "A New Modernity : Living and Believing in an unstable world" oleh sebab ia mampu memperlihatkan konteks problematis mutakhir yang dihadapi Gereja Katolik khususnya, dan agama umumnya, secara menyeluruh dan mendalam. Sementara Chioma Opara, pemikir feminis Nigeria, menyumbangkan artikel yang menarik pula perkara kekhasan pengertian "transendensi" dalam konteks dunia perempuan Afrika saat ini. Artikelnya yang bertajuk "On the African concept of Transcendence: conflating nature, nurture and creativity" adalah upaya menawarkan sudut pandang lain untuk memahami keterkaitan antara bumi, perempuan dan transendensi. Sedang Bambang Sugiharto , lewat artikel "Religion, Culture and Identity  Revisited" mencoba menyingkapkan berbagai titik lemah dari anggapan-anggapan konvensional yang  sering terlalu cepat mengidentikan religi, kebudayaan dan identitas. Lantas Eddy Kristiyanto mengakhiri tema religi ini lewat artikel "Absolutisme Negara dan Lembaga Agama: Pasca Aufklärung di Eropa Barat" yang mengaji ulang hubungan antara Gereja dan Negara sekitar abad  pasca Pencerahan. Suatu inspirasi yang bisa berguna bagi Indonesia yang kini persis sedang diharu-biru oleh tegangan serius antara kepentingan agama dan kepentingan negara.  

    Selebihnya adalah suguhan lebih ringan  namun menarik juga. Tulisan Budiono Kusumohamidjojo yang bertajuk "Dialog imajiner dengan Hans Kelsen tentang keadilan", adalah diskusi segar  ihwal keadilan, tema yang hingga kini tetaplah merupakan kata kunci di balik segala kemelut hari ini (dari soal BBM hingga terrorisme). Dan akhirnya seniman kondang Putu Wijaya, dalam rubrik baru "Insight", lewat tulisan "Menakar Bawahsadar Kolektif Manusia Indonesia" mengajak kita mengintip tendensi-tendensi bawah-sadar kita sendiri yang kerap tersembunyi dan mengangkatnya sebagai kecerdasan lokal yang bisa sangat produktif untuk menyikapi persoalan jaman. Selamat membaca.

    Redaksi

  • Vol. 21 No. 1 (2005)

    (This edition [Vol. 21, No. 1] was originally published with the numbering Vol. 21, No. 64: April - Agustus 2005.)

    Ada saatnya tindakan menggugat diri sendiri merupakan sebuah keharusan, bahkan mungkin kearifan. Hari-hari ini ketika sistem-sistem nilai berinteraksi ketat dengan segala sistem lainnya selalu ada kemungkinan bahwa kepastian-kepastian semula berubah menjadi meragukan. Jaman ini memang ditandai dengan ketidakpastian dari demikian banyaknya kepastian yang saling bertentangan, the uncertainty of contradictory certainties, kata Ulrich Beck. Perkembangan pemikiran kritis akibat interaksi itu seperti tak terelakkan memaksa kita untuk memikirkan ulang segala hal yang pernah kita yakini.

    Lantas menggugat adalah suatu proses mencari pemahaman baru yang lebih mendasar atas nilai-nilai dan keyakinan-keyakinan. Itu bisa berarti mencari nilai etis yang mendasar dan sama di balik perbedaan keyakinan religius dalam rangka memahami kembali arti yang lebih realistis dari konsep "toleransi" seperti di bahas oleh Peter Kemp presiden federasi masyarakat filsafat internasional dalam artikelnya "Towards a New Tolerance". Tapi gugatan bisa juga berarti upaya menguji kekuatan pondasi sebuah sistem keyakinan. Dan ini mirip yang pernah dilakukan Sokrates dan Nietzsche, seperti dilukiskan Roy Voragen dalam tulisannya :" As if We all are free". Bahkan ritual pun, yang umumnya tampak bagai perayaan legitimasi status quo, sesungguhnya selalu berpotensi subversif berbahaya, sebab ritual adalah juga saat-saat reaktualisasi keyakinan dalam konteks baru, saat-saat penemuan baru. Tentang ini Eddy Putranto bicara panjang dalam artikelnya "Ritual : an inventive human symbolic action". Selebihnya Agus Rachmat W. menggugat kehidupan ekonomi saat ini dengan memperkarakan landasan etisnya. Disana rasionalitas instrumental belaka dianggap tak memadai, perlu ditambah rasionalitas affektif dan normatif. Itu dibahas dalam artikelnya " Landasan Etis Kegiatan Ekonomi". Dan Maman Suharman memperkarakan ihwal identitas Kultural dengan studi kasus budaya Sunda di Jawabarat dalam artikelnya " Melacak Identitas Budaya : kasus budaya Sunda", dengan mengedepankan posisi narrasi disana. Akhirnya Leo Samosir melihat sistem keyakinan religius kristiani sebagai bentuk gugatan dan tantangan itu pada dirinya sendiri. Silahkan baca artikelnya yang berjudul " Yesus, tawaran yang menggugat". Selamat menikmati. - Redaksi.

26-48 of 48