Great Thinkers of Liberalism and their Philosophies

(June 24, 2006; Open Dialogue Centre, Damansara Heights, Kuala Lumpur)

This forum attempts to introduce the great thinkers of liberalism, such as John Locke, J.S. Mill, Kant, Karl Popper, Richard Rorty, etc. This discourse will discuss, generally, their life, ideas, works, and significance, as well as the context of their times – as a prolegomena to liberal ideas. It is expected to expose the audience to the foundation of liberal ideas for more serious discussion.

Q & A Session:

Question : Until now there is no critical and rational interpretation of the civilization and religion in Malaysia. And the emergence of religion in Malaysia is very close minded rather than open and universal understanding and interpretation of religion. That is because we don’t practice modernist project of equality. For example, if one author gives his statements it will be accept and never be tested or challenged. But it is contrary in the West, if one university professor gives his statements it will be criticized by the other professors. More to the point, the modernity in our region is decline in rationality. In addition, our modern project never has secure foundation. For instance, we have so many universities than twenty years ago, but our rational thinking is very lack, even among the scientists and engineers. So we have science without scientific thinking. And the most close minded which I discovers are among people in the scientific field. I think you know the cause of this situation.

Answer : I don’t know how to explain this situation, but I have my own theory, that is, theory of scientific depression. They have their own natural tendencies but they have forced to be a scientist. When they go out from that context they will follow their own tendencies. And it was helped by the lack of scientific foundation in our educational system.

Question : But unfortunately, several decades ago the scientists feel superior in front of ulema but know it was different. And if we look in the West, people can debunk, dismiss and criticized severely even the point of view of the prime minister.

Answer : The problem I think is when the colonial come to Malaya they have declared that they wouldn’t touch the religion and custom of Malay society. In fact, this is the reverse of modernity.

Question : Besides that, the first generation of our university administrators comes from humanity studies, but they don’t emphasize on the study of philosophy and don’t think that it was an important knowledge.

Answer : But now it’s become more problematic when the idea of corporatization [of knowledge] has been implemented in our universities.

Question : But is there any demand from students or people for study of philosophy?

Answer : But the university [professors] think what job they can get?

Question : I don’t think what job they can get, but the question is there any demands for study of philosophy?

Answer : From my observation, students from faculty of art are very interested in study in philosophy. We can see this when most of them takes the philosophical subjects in my department.

Question : We can’t deny the fact that study of philosophy is really interesting.

Answer : In fact, they would be a great policy and decision makers, such as the graduates from Faculty of Philosophy, Politic and Economy, Oxford University.

Question : I think there is no problem with study of philosophy. In fact, in Iran we have to study of theology first if we want to study of philosophy.

Answer : That is the methodology of study in medieval philosophy. And it was applied in the East and West in medieval age.

Question : We can see that the most progressive philosophical thought in Muslim world still using the 12th century methodology.

Question : Mr. Khalid has said that you are not agreeing with postmodernism project in Malaysia because the modernity project not complete yet. So if we are not trying to discuss this sort of thought we will out dated. And I think the academias are responsible to take this task.

Answer : Actually this is the question of who want modern and who want postmodern. And in this two thought there still the same themes or liberal components has been discussed, such as limited government, free market, the rule of law. And what is called democracy is one of the manifestations of Western rationality. Hence we can choose what can be taken as our own rationality. But unfortunately, there is some individuals seek to give negative connotation on liberalism.

Question : As we have seen, liberalism discourse in Malaysia come with the discourse of “Islam Liberal.” So, I think, it contributes to the misperception towards liberalism among our society. In addition, some individuals try to consider this question from legalistic point of view. If, from the very beginning, we attempt to create a discourse of liberal democracy, I think, the response would be different.

Question : But the problem is, our liberal Muslim thinkers never mention that they are liberal and never explain what is liberal. We never find this statement in the works of Muhammad Muhammad Abduh, Taha Husain, as well as Muhammad Iqbal. Whereas there are many things we have got from the project of liberalism such as abolition of slavery, and parliamentary democracy which safe us from absolute monarchy.

Conclusion – When we are on the post colonial era, liberalism is not really the issue for us. And there are so many policies has been taken by the government such as affirmative action which is contrary to the liberal ideas. And if we open the discourse of liberalism on that time we can argue against that policy at the same time.

Article on the Program (Malay)

TENTANG LIBERALISME YANG ‘BERDOSA’
Jimadie Shah Othman

Dalam konteks Malaysia, pandangan terhadap liberalisme sering disalah tanggap. Liberalisme dipercayai sebagai konsep Barat yang tidak cocok dalam lingkungan budaya dan masyarakat setempat. Liberalisme menjadi sebuah ideologi, pandangan falsafah dan nilai politik yang ‘berdosa’.

Kecaman mutakhir terhadap liberalisme bermula dengan melebarnya fahaman Islam Liberal, yang dilihat sebagai ‘pengacau’ kepada faham tradisional versi Sunni dalam agama. Kerana itu, hampir segala macam pergulatan dalam pemaknaan (dan pengalaman) agama tidak lepas dikaitkan dengan perkataan liberal, selain hedonisme dan penyelewangan dari kemurnian agama.

Insitusi mufti, yang sangat eletis itu, sering mengeluarkan kritikan mengkal dan rasa kurang selesa dengan perkataan “kebebasan” yang menjadi pokok kepada perbicaraan liberalisme, tanpa merujuk kepada sumber rujukan yang sahih dalam disiplin ini; sedangkan pokok perbicaraan seputar liberalisme itu luas (juga tua) sekali merangkumi kebebasan berfikir bagi individu, pembatasan kekuasaan, penegakan hukum, pertukaran gagasan yang bebas, ekonomi pasar yang mendukung usaha peribadi (private enterprise) yang relatif bebas, dan suatu sistem pemerintahan yang telus, yang di dalamnya hak-hak kaum minoriti dijamin.

Tetapi liberalisme yang ‘berdosa’ itu, sering bermula dengan hujahan mengkal berdasarkan ‘kata orang’—sebuah liberalisme yang tidak mengenal John Locke, J.S Mill dan Kant, apatah lagi pemikir-pemikir yang lebih kontemporari seperti Karl Popper dan Richard Rorty.

Dalam sebuah wacana intelektual yang dianjurkan oleh Open Dialogue Centre (ODC), sebuah organisasi yang didediksikan untuk mempromosikan keterbukaan dan sebagai pusat kepada aktiviti anak muda, sebuah pembentangan menarik daripada Prof. Mohd Hazim Shah telah dilangsungkan.

Prof. Hazim, seorang doktor falsafah lulusan Universiti Pitttsburg, Amerika Syarikat yang kini mengajar di Universiti Malaya telah membentangkan sebuah kertas menarik dengan judul “Popper and Rorty on Science and Liberalisme and Its Implications for Multiculturalisme”.

Dalam pembentangan itu beliau menghuraikan pandangan-pandangan beliau tentang pelebaran idea dua ahli falsafah besar ini (fokus kepada Sains dan liberalisme) kepada masyarakat multikultural. Selepasmenghuraikan kelahiran dan pembentukan idea liberalisme dari awal, dalam konteks Eropah, beliau mengaku sukar mempertembungkannya dalam situasi semasa. Dalam aliran ini, kemuncaknya ialah perkembangan sampai kepada Popper dan Rorty yang jarak hidupnya tidak jauh dari kita (mendiang Popper Cuma meninggalkan kita tidak sampai sepuluh tahun yang lalu) manakala Rorty masih memegang Profesor Emeritus di Universiti Stanford dalam bidang Kesusasteraan Bandingan.

Popper, ahli falsafah kelahiran Austria yang membesarkan idea-ideanya dalam aliran critical rationalisme dan fallibilisme mengasaskan Open Society. Dalam magnum opusnya The Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper mengemukan kritikan terdapat mazhab historisme; justeru mempertahankan demokrasi liberal. Falsafahnya merangkumi politik dan Sains.

Rorty pula yang memuncak dengan Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature yang seperti mempertikaikan epistemologi, teori ilmu, sebagai produk daripada pandangan yang salah tentang minda.

Antara isu menarik yang dibincangkan pada hari tersebut adalah sikap mahasiswa yang tidak saintifik dalam kehidupan seharian. Khalid Jaafar, pemikir dan filsuf yang mengaku liberal, yang turut hadir dalam sesi berikut, secara berjenaka berkata, “saya hairan, pelajar (aliran) Sains dan Kejuruteraan, dalam makmal mereka menjadi sangat saintifik, tetapi di luar, dalam kehidupan sebenar, semua itu tidak berlaku.”

Majlis tersebut dipengerusikan oleh Zamil Penyelidik di ODC, Amir Sari dan merupakan siri pertama daripada lapan siri wacana intelektual yang dijadualkan secara bulanan bermula Jun lalu.

Institusi mufti yang tadi, jika beliau mengenal susur galur ideologi yang ini, pasti dengan tidak senang-senang melabelkan liberalisme sebagai berdosa, bahkan ‘sesat lagi menyesatkan’.

[ Back ]