Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.431
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Cakrawala Pendidikan Medikora: Jurnal Ilmiah Kesehatan Olahraga Jurnal Energi Dan Manufaktur Jurnal Kedokteran Syiah Kuala Abdimas Akuntansi Krida Wacana Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri UNEJ e-Proceeding Jurnal Taman Vokasi IJIES (International Journal of Innovation in Enterprise System) VISI PUSTAKA: Buletin Jaringan Informasi Antar Perpustakaan JURNAL ILMIAH AGRINECA Mechonversio: Mechanical Engineering Journal Perspektif Akuntansi SRIWIJAYA JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT JURNAL RUMPUN MANAJEMEN DAN EKONOMI Jurnal Bisnis Kreatif dan Inovatif Jurnal Akuntansi International Journal of Economics, Commerce, and Management Sosial : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan IPS Jurnal Budi Pekerti Agama Kristen dan Katolik Moral : Jurnal Kajian Pendidikan Islam
Subagyo Subagyo
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Aerospace Engineering Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Automotive Engineering Chemistry Computer Science & IT Control & Systems Engineering Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Mathematics Mechanical Engineering Medicine & Pharmacology Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 36 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 36 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4 
Dialektika Positivisme dan Teori Kritis dalam Ilmu Sosial Dida Maulidya Al Afshana; Agung Winarno; Subagyo Subagyo
SOSIAL : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan IPS Vol 3 No 4 (2025): SOSIAL: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan IPS
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti Dan Pengajar Ilmu Sosial Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/sosial.v3i4.1381

Abstract

This study examines the dialectic between positivism and critical theory as two major paradigms shaping the development of modern social science epistemology. Positivism, with its emphasis on objectivity, empirical verification, and causal laws, has become the foundation for systematic and measurable scientific research methods. However, the dominance of this paradigm has drawn criticism from critical theorists, highlighting positivism's limitations in understanding the historical, ideological, and power relations that influence social reality. This study aims to analyze the dialectical relationship between the two paradigms by examining their contributions, fundamental differences, and potential integration in the development of social science methodology. The method used is a conceptual-based literature review, through a review of relevant philosophical and methodological literature. The research findings indicate that positivism and critical theory not only represent paradigmatic opposition but also provide complementary opportunities for developing a more holistic approach to social research. Positivism plays a role in providing empirical rigor, while critical theory offers a reflective framework for understanding meaning, ideology, and power structures.
Aliran-Aliran Filsafat dan Relevansinya dalam Pemikiran Modern Siti Ulfatul Faizah; Agung Winarno; Subagyo Subagyo
Moral : Jurnal kajian Pendidikan Islam Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Desember : Moral : Jurnal kajian Pendidikan Islam
Publisher : Asosiasi Riset Ilmu Pendidikan Agama dan Filsafat Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/moral.v2i4.1553

Abstract

The development of philosophy from the classical to the contemporary era shows fundamental changes in the way humans understand reality with the emergence of various schools of thought that address epistemological, ontological, and ethical issues in an increasingly complex social context. This study aims to examine the contributions of key concepts from rationalism, empiricism, idealism, materialism, positivism, pragmatism, phenomenology, existentialism, Marxism, Islamic existentialism, and neopositivism, as well as assess their relevance to modern dynamics such as identity crises, technological advances, and changes in socio-economic structures. Using a conceptual approach to literature review, various previous studies were analyzed to build an integrated understanding of the position of each school of thought in the development of science and social practice. The findings show that rationalism and empiricism continue to underpin scientific methods, idealism and materialism offer different perspectives on social construction, phenomenology and existentialism deepen the understanding of subjective experience, while Marxism and pragmatism provide an analytical framework for power relations and practical action. Neopositivism continues to influence quantitative methodology, while Islamic existentialism provides a contextual moral perspective. This study emphasizes the need for an interdisciplinary approach because no single philosophical school of thought is capable of explaining reality in its entirety.
ONTOLOGI SAINS FONDASI FILOSOFIS ILMU PENGETAHUAN DI ERA MODERN Bhernanda Tri Mulia Aziza Putri Artino; Agung Winarno; Subagyo Subagyo
JURNAL RUMPUN MANAJEMEN DAN EKONOMI Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Januari
Publisher : CV. KAMPUS AKADEMIK PUBLISHING

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61722/jrme.v3i1.7693

Abstract

Perkembangan IPTEK yang pesat dan pergeseran paradigma seringkali membuat ilmu pengetahuan menyimpang dari fondasi filosofis awalnya yang seharusnya bertujuan mensejahterakan manusia. Krisis epistemik kontemporer dan munculnya teknologi baru juga menantang konsep realitas yang kuat. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis secara konseptual ontologi sains sebagai fondasi filosofis utama bagi ilmu pengetahuan di era modern. Metode yang digunakan adalah studi literatur konseptual yang mengumpulkan dan menganalisis data sekunder dari sumber-sumber yang kredibel. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa ontologi sains modern berfungsi sebagai jembatan krusial yang mendasari asumsi teoritis dan membentuk batasan penelitian. Disimpulkan bahwa pengakuan dan dukungan pluralitas ontologis adalah kunci untuk membangun ilmu pengetahuan yang seimbang, bertanggung jawab dan berorientasi pada kemaslahatan umat manusia di era modern, melampaui sekadar pencarian kebenaran faktual.
Teori - Teori Kebenaran sebagai Fondasi Etika Keilmuan Hapsari, Cecilia Indah; Agung Winarno; Subagyo Subagyo
Jurnal Budi Pekerti Agama Kristen dan Katolik Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): Desember : Jurnal Budi Pekerti Agama Kristen dan Katolik
Publisher : Asosiasi Riset Pendidikan Agama dan Filsafat Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/jbpakk.v3i4.1676

Abstract

The background of this research stems from the need to reexamine the position of theories of truth in the philosophy of science as a basis for the formation of scientific ethics amid the increasingly complex development of modern science. The concept of truth not only functions as an epistemological guideline in determining the validity of knowledge, but also has a normative dimension that influences the integrity, honesty, and responsibility of scientists in the research process. Based on this, this study aims to analyze various theories of truth, including correspondence, coherence, pragmatism, consensus, performativity, deflationism, and foundationalism, and to explain the relevance of each approach to the formation of scientific ethics. This study uses a literature review method with a descriptive-analytical approach through a systematic search of relevant journals, books, and academic sources, which are then analyzed through thematic synthesis to obtain a comprehensive conceptual understanding. The findings show that each theory of truth has a unique contribution to building scientific ethics. Correspondence emphasizes the importance of empirical verification, coherence emphasizes rational consistency, pragmatism highlights theoretical functionality, consensus places scientific dialogue as the legitimization of knowledge, performativity connects truth with action, the deflationary approach emphasizes clarity of language, and foundationalism provides a stable epistemic foundation. The implications of this research show that the integration of these various theories can form a more robust, holistic, and adaptive framework of scientific ethics to the demands of modern scientific practice. This framework is expected to strengthen an honest, transparent, and accountable scientific culture, while opening opportunities for the development of epistemology-based research ethics guidelines in the future.
Sains Berbasis Nilai: Kajian Aksiologis dan Etis Putri, Bintang; Winarno, Agung; Subagyo Subagyo
Jurnal Bisnis Kreatif dan Inovatif Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Juni: Jurnal Bisnis Kreatif dan Inovatif
Publisher : Asosiasi Riset Ilmu Manajemen dan Bisnis Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/jubikin.v2i4.1076

Abstract

This article examines the role of axiology as a value dimension in the philosophy of science, which serves to guide science so that it not only produces knowledge but also provides benefits that align with humanitarian, ethical, and sustainable values. This research uses a library study method by reviewing various literature discussing the concept of axiology. The results of the study indicate that science cannot be viewed as a value-free activity, because every stage of the scientific process, from problem selection and method development to data interpretation and application of research results, is constantly influenced by social norms, moral considerations, and certain values. Therefore, axiology plays a crucial role in ensuring that scientific progress prioritizes human welfare and does not have destructive impacts. Furthermore, critical thinking skills are an important element in the application of axiology, as they enable humans to assess and consider the benefits and consequences of science more deeply. This study also emphasizes that scientists have a moral responsibility both internally, such as maintaining academic integrity and scientific objectivity, and externally, namely ensuring that research results are utilized for the common good. Thus, this article highlights the importance of integration between science, ethics, and values ​​as a foundation for developing knowledge that is not only scientifically correct, but also morally good and beneficial for the sustainability of life.
The Epistemic Authorship Crisis in the Age of Generative AI: Overcoming the Responsibility Gap through Hyper Justification Obligations Rizky Fahmi Saputra; Mohammad Isa Wibisono; Agung Winarno; Subagyo Subagyo
International Journal of Economics, Commerce, and Management Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): International Journal of Economics, Commerce, and Management
Publisher : Asosiasi Riset Ekonomi dan Akuntansi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62951/ijecm.v3i1.1090

Abstract

The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in scientific research is becoming increasingly widespread, but presents epistemic risks that are not yet fully understood. This article discusses how the probabilistic mechanisms of LLM can produce outputs that appear correct and justified but are actually dependent on epistemic luck, thus resembling the Gettier case pattern. Through a conceptual study approach, this research clarifies concepts, analytically reconstructs the generative structure of LLM, and conducts a normative analysis of its implications for scientific accountability and authorship. The results of the analysis show that Algorithmic Gettier Cases (AGCs) occur when linguistic coherence deceives users and creates the impression of justification, even though the truth that emerges is statistical coincidence and is not supported by valid causal relationships. This condition poses a serious challenge to the attribution of knowledge and author responsibility in the production of academic texts. To address this issue, this article proposes the principle of Hyper-Justification Obligation, which is the ethical obligation for researchers to actively verify and causally reason every AI output before using it in scientific works. This research provides a theoretical contribution to understanding the epistemic risks of LLM and offers an ethical foundation for academic practice in the era of generative AI.
Co-Authors Agung Winarno Andi Sudiarso Andi Suhardiyanto Angeline Angeline Ardi Widiyatmaka ARI SUSANTO Arifudin Idrus Asra Al Fauzi Bhernanda Tri Mulia Aziza Putri Artino Damayanti, Elok Dida Maulidya Al Afshana Donatus Hendra Amijaya Eko Handoyo Fitraini Fitraini Hapsari, Cecilia Indah Herni Kurniawati Holyness Nurdin Singadimedja Jemima Christy Kurniawanti Kurniawanti Martien Herna Susanti Mohamad Anis Mohammad Isa Wibisono Muhammad Kusumawan Herliansyah Nuzula Fikrin Nabila Oktavia Oktavia Putri, Bintang Retno Indriartiningtias Rizky Fahmi Saputra Septian Bayu Kristanto Siti Ulfatul Faizah Sutarno Sutarno