Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tren cancel culture saat ini telah menjadi topik yang mengundang banyak perdebatan di media sosial. Yang dimaksud dari tren cancel culture adalah sebuah konsep bahwa seorang individu atau kelompok dapat “dibatalkan” atau “disingkirkan” akibat memiliki perilaku bermasalah yang tidak dapat diterima oleh publik (Mayasari, 2022). Pada topik penelitian ini, penulis mengakarkan permasalahan pada pertanyaan mengapa dominasi pandangan subjektif dapat mengindikasikan bahwa tren cancel culture termasuk ke dalam satu bentuk baru dari budaya perundungan. Subjektivitas pada tren cancel culture ini nyatanya berperan besar pada asumsi bahwa cancel culture merupakan satu bentuk baru dari budaya perundungan. Hal tersebut menyatakan bahwa dominasi pandangan subjektif individu tidak seharusnya menjadi upaya untuk menghasilkan output yang objektif sebab dapat mengesampingkan aspek logis dalam menilai individu lain dan mengindikasikan hadirnya hasrat kebencian di dalam pandangan subjektif tersebut. Banyak dijumpai masyarakat yang didapati memiliki intensi kebencian (dalam konteks rasial ataupun non-rasial) kepada korban dari tren cancel culture dan hal tersebut dianggap inheren dengan budaya perundungan. Seperti pada beberapa kasus cancel culture yang diterapkan kepada beberapa tokoh publik seperti Gofar Hilman, Kim Seon Ho, dan Johnny Depp yang sama-sama memiliki pola kejadian serupa. Maka dari itu, penelitian ini berupaya untuk melahirkan kesadaran akan dominasi keberadaan subjektivitas yang nyatanya menghasilkan kepercayaan objektif yang buruk dengan hadirnya tren cancel culture sebagai sebuah bentuk budaya perundungan yang baru. Penulis menjadikan teori ketidakadilan epistemik atau epistemic injustice yang digagas oleh Miranda Fricker (1966), seorang filsuf Inggris, yang menegaskan pemikirannya pada ketidakadilan epistemik yang bersumber dari konsep ketidakadilan yang dilakukan agen penahu terhadap seseorang. Dominasi subjektivitas yang terdapat pada tren cancel culture ini membawa penulis pada analisis mengenai adanya ketidakadilan epistemik yang terdapat dalam subjektivitas tersebut.......The current cancel culture trend has become a topic that invites a lot of debate on social media. What is meant by the cancel culture trend is a concept that an individual or group can be “canceled” or “removed” due to having problematic behavior that is unacceptable to the public (Mayasari, 2022). On this research topic, the authors root the problem on the question why the dominance of subjective views can indicate that the cancel culture trend is included in a new form of bullying culture. The subjectivity of the cancel culture trend actually plays a major role in the assumption that cancel culture is a new form of bullying culture. This states that the domination of individual subjective views should not be an effort to produce objective outputs because it can override the logical aspect of judging other individuals and indicates the presence of a desire for hatred in that subjective view. There are many people who are found to have hateful intentions (in a racial or non-racial context) towards victims of the cancel culture trend and this is considered to be inherent in a culture of bullying. As in several cases of cancel culture which was applied to several public figures such as Gofar Hilman, Kim Seon Ho, and Johnny Depp who both had a similar pattern of incidents. Therefore, this research seeks to raise awareness of the domination of subjectivity which in fact produces bad objective beliefs with the presence of the cancel culture trend as a new cultural form of bullying. The author makes the theory of epistemic injustice initiated by Miranda Fricker (1966), a British philosopher, who emphasizes her thoughts on epistemic injustice originating from the concept of injustice perpetrated by a knowledge agent against someone. The dominance of subjectivity in the cancel culture trend brings the author to an analysis of the existence of epistemic injustice in that subjectivity."

"Artikel ini membahas mengenai persoalan ketidakadilan epistemik yang muncul dalam rape culture. Rape culture dianggap sebagai hal yang normal karena tiadanya pengakuan tubuh dan pengalaman di ruang publik, sementara tubuh privat sendiri diatur. Perbincangan sarat pelecehan sering kita temui sehari-hari, bahkan korban tidak dapat menolak. Penelitian ini membongkar epistemologi yang terjadi di masyarakat, hingga rape culture bisa dinormalkan. Penelitian ini menerapkan metode analisis, yaitu metode epistemologi feminis yang fokus pada standpoint knowledge dalam pengumpulan data. Saya memiliki argumen bahwa masyarakat mampu berpikir demikian, dikarenakan ada epistemologi yang bekerja secara menyimpang. Cara kerja epistmeologi ini membuktikkan bagaimana standar pengetahuan masyarakat membiarkan rape culture terbentuk dan terus dibiarkan dalam kehidupan sehari-hari.......This article discusses the issue of epistemic injustice that arises in rape culture. Rape culture is considered as a normal thing because there is no recognition of the body andexperience in the public space, while the private body itself is regulated. We often encounter conversations full of harassment every day, even victims cannot refuse. This research dismantles the epistemology that occurs in society, so that rape culture can be normalized. This study applies an analytical method, namely a feminist epistemologicalmethod that focuses on standpoint knowledge in data collection. I have an argument that society is able to think that way, because there’s an epistemology that works in a wrong way. The way this epistemology works is proves how public knowledge standards allow rape culture to form and continue to be allowed in everyday life."

"The relation between logic and knowledge has been at the heart of a lively debate since the 1960s. On the one hand, the epistemic approaches based their formal arguments in the mathematics of Brouwer and intuitionistic logic. Following Michael Dummett, they started to call themselves `antirealists'. Others persisted with the formal background of the Frege-Tarski tradition, where Cantorian set theory is linked via model theory to classical logic. Jaakko Hintikka tried to unify both traditions by means of what is now known as `explicit epistemic logic'. The editors of the present volume believe that in the age of Alternative Logics, where manifold developments in logic happen at a breathtaking pace, this debate should be revisited. Contributors to this volume happily took on this challenge and responded with new approaches to the debate from both the explicit and the implicit epistemic point of view."