Globalisasi dan Masa Depan Studi Agama: Relativisme, Kosmopolitanisme, dan Kerentanan Manusia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/jim.v4i6.1696Keywords:
Globalisasi, Studi Agama, Relativisme, Kosmopolitanisme, Kerentanan ManusiaAbstract
Globalisasi telah mengubah secara signifikan lanskap keberagamaan dan paradigma studi agama kontemporer. Intensifikasi mobilitas manusia, perkembangan teknologi komunikasi, serta pluralisasi budaya lintas batas negara mendorong agama keluar dari kerangka teritorial dan nasional menuju konfigurasi transnasional dan hibrid. Kondisi ini memperkuat relativisme sebagai konsekuensi epistemologis utama dalam studi agama, sekaligus menantang kemampuan disiplin ini dalam merespons konflik, krisis kemanusiaan, dan fragmentasi makna di tingkat global. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis masa depan studi agama dalam konteks globalisasi dengan menyoroti relasi antara relativisme, kosmopolitanisme, dan kerentanan manusia berdasarkan pemikiran Bryan S. Turner. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan metode literature review terhadap karya-karya teoretis dan penelitian terdahulu dalam bidang sosiologi agama, studi globalisasi, dan teori kosmopolitanisme. Analisis dilakukan secara tematik-konseptual untuk mengidentifikasi pola argumentasi, posisi epistemologis, serta implikasi normatif dari perdebatan akademik yang relevan. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa relativisme kultural yang dominan dalam studi agama bersifat tidak terhindarkan, namun memiliki keterbatasan sebagai dasar etika. Kosmopolitanisme muncul sebagai orientasi etis alternatif yang mengakui pluralitas agama sekaligus menuntut refleksivitas dan tanggung jawab lintas batas. Artikel ini menyimpulkan bahwa konsep kerentanan manusia dapat berfungsi sebagai landasan ontologis bersama yang mengikat kosmopolitanisme dan studi agama dalam dunia global yang rapuh dan saling terhubung. Dengan mengintegrasikan kesadaran akan kerentanan manusia, studi agama dapat melampaui pendekatan deskriptif semata dan berkontribusi pada pengembangan etika global yang peka terhadap pluralitas serta tanggung jawab kemanusiaan.
References
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. University of Minnesota Press.
Beck, U. (2006). The cosmopolitan vision. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (2009). World at risk. Polity Press.
Berger, P. L. (2014). The many altars of modernity: Toward a paradigm for religion in a pluralist age. De Gruyter.
Beyer, P. (2013). Religion in the context of globalization: Essays on concept, form, and political implication. Routledge.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Butler, J. (2004). Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. Verso.
Casanova, J. (2018). Global religious and secular dynamics: The modern system of classification. Brill.
Delanty, G. (2009). The cosmopolitan imagination: The renewal of critical social theory. Cambridge University Press.
Fitzgerald, T. (2015). Religion and politics in international relations: The modern myth. Bloomsbury.
Fineman, M. A. (2008). The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition. Yale Journal of Law & Feminism, 20(1), 1–23.
Hervieu-Léger, D. (2000). Religion as a chain of memory. Polity Press.
Hjarvard, S. (2016). Mediatization and the changing authority of religion. Media, Culture & Society, 38(1), 8–17.
McCutcheon, R. T. (2007). Manufacturing religion: The discourse on sui generis religion and the politics of nostalgia. Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2019). The cosmopolitan tradition: A noble but flawed ideal. Harvard University Press.
Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time–space and homogeneity–heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 25–44). SAGE.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.
Troeltsch, E. (1992). The absoluteness of Christianity and the history of religions. Westminster John Knox Press.
Turner, B. S. (2007). Globalization and the future of religious studies. In J. A. Beckford & N. J. Demerath (Eds.), The Sage handbook of the sociology of religion (pp. 85–104). SAGE.
Turner, B. S. (2011). Religion and modern society: Citizenship, secularisation and the state. Cambridge University Press.
World Health Organization. (2021). Global health estimates 2021: Deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). WHO.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dody S. Truna, Dadan Saputra, H Rifky Rosyad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share— copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt— remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution— You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions— You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rightsmay limit how you use the material.
