The Possibility of Interreligious Dialogue: A Philosophical Foundation

Risalatul Hukmi(1*)

(1) Universitas Gadjah Mada
(*) Corresponding Author


The possibility of interreligious dialogue depends, at least, on the justification for the existence of religion itself. Thus, the constructionist theory of religion becomes a fundamental problem in constructing a framework of interreligious dialogue theory because religion is expressed as an imaginary existence, in the sense that it is only the construction of scholars and academics. If the existence of religion itself cannot be justified ontologically, it means that interreligious dialogue is impossible. Hence, to answer that problem, we inevitably have to prove ontologically the existence of religion without having to reject the constructionist theory. In this paper, I use the social ontology analysis proposed by John Searle and the historical ontology theory proposed by Ian Hacking to prove that religion as a constructed social reality exists objectively. Thus, interreligious dialogue is possible within a framework of existential hermeneutics that presupposes a process of understanding that changes continuously in accordance with historical ontology as its foundation.


Dialog Antar Agama, Ontologi Sosial, Hermeneutika Eksistensial, Teori Konstruksionis.

Full Text:



Agosta, L. (2010). Empathy in the Context of Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Arnal, W., McCutcheon, R. T. (2013). The sacred is the profane: the political nature of ”religion”. Oxford University Press.

Asad, T. (2001). Reading a Modern Classic: W. C. Smith’s The Meaning and End of Religion. History of Religions, 40(3), 205–222.

Cornille, C. (2008). The im-possibility of interreligious dialogue. Crossroad Publ..

_________. (2013) Conditions for inter-religious dialogue. In The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Inter-Religious Dialogue. 20-33.

Dubuisson, D. (2003). The Western Construction of Religion: Myths, Knowledge, and Ideology. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.

Engler, S. (2005). Two problems with constructionism in the study of religion. Revista de Estudos da Religião (Rever), 5(4), 28-34.

Fitzgerald, T. (1997). A critique of" religion" as a cross-cultural category1. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 9(2), 91-110.

____________. (2000). The Ideology of Religious Studies. Oxford University Press.

Gonzales, F. J. (2006). Dialectic and Dialogue in the Hermeneutics of Paul Ricouer and H.G. Gadamer. Continental Philosophy Review, 39 (1), 313–345.

Hacking, I. (2002). Historical Ontology. London: Harvard University Press.

___________(1999). The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Hauswald, R. (2016). The ontology of interactive kinds. Journal of Social Ontology, 2(2), 203-221.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Harper and Row

Hidayat, R. (2018). Feminist Epistemology and The Search For Liberating Knowledge. Jurnal Filsafat, 28(2), 141-159.

Hukmi, R. (2021). The Ontological Status of Religion and Its Significance for Religious Freedom. Yogyakara: Antinomi.

Pratt, D. (1994). “Phenomenology and dialogue: A methodological consideration.” Islam and Christian‐Muslim Relations 5:1. 5-13.

Schilbrack, K. (2010). Religions: Are there any?. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 78(4), 1112-1138.

___________. (2012). The social construction of “religion” and its limits: A critical reading of Timothy Fitzgerald. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 24(2), 97-117.

___________. (2013). After We Deconstruct’ Religion,’Then What? A Case for Critical Realism. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 25(1), 107-112.

___________. (2016). A realist social ontology of religion. Religion, 47(2), 161-178.

Searle, J. R.. (1998). Social ontology and the philosophy of society. In Analyse & Kritik 20, 143-158.

__________(2010). Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Smith, J. Z. (1982). Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Smith, W. C. (1963). The Meaning and End of Religion. New York: Macmillan.

Speelman, G. M. (2010). Encounters between Christian and Muslim Women in the Netherlands. Exchange, 39(3), 251-269.

Stone, J. (Ed.). (2016). The Essential Max Müller: on language, mythology, and religion. Springer.

Stowers, S. (2008). The ontology of religion.Introducing Religion: essays in honor of Jonathan Z. Smith, 434-49.

Swamy, M. (2016). The problem with interreligious dialogue: plurality, conflict and elitism in hindu-christian-muslim relations. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Swidler, L. (2013). The history of inter-religious dialogue. The Wiley-Blackwell companion to inter-religious dialogue, 3-19.

Taira, T. (2013). Making space for discursive study in religious studies. Religion, 43(1), 26-45.

Weldemina T. Y., Febby, P. N. (2019). Presence of women in conflict resolution efforts in Ambon, Southwest Maluku Regency of indonesia. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 8(92).


Article Metrics

Abstract views : 751 | views : 1185


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 Jurnal Filsafat

Jurnal Filsafat Indexed by:

Google ScholarSinta (Science and Technology Index)

Jurnal Filsafat ISSN 0853-1870 (print), ISSN 2528-6811 (online)