Scientific Approach Methodology Model of Thought/Theory of Imre Lakatos' Research Program

Durotul Qoyimah; Usman Usman

doi:10.31943/afkarjournal.v9i1.2818

Authors

Durotul Qoyimah Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta
Usman Usman Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31943/afkarjournal.v9i1.2818

Keywords:

Imre Lakatos, Research Program Methodology, Thinking

Abstract

This article discusses the scientific thinking of Imre Lakatos, a Hungarian philosopher of science who combined important elements of Karl Popper's falsification theory and Thomas Kuhn's scientific paradigm, thus giving birth to the idea of a scientific research program methodology. In this framework, science is seen as a process of gradual theory evolution through a structured and dynamic research program. Lakatos emphasized that the development of science is not simply determined by a single piece of evidence that refutes an old theory, but rather through a series of theories developed based on strong basic principles. His research program model consists of three main elements, namely: (1) Hard core as a core principle that cannot be challenged, (2) Protective belt in the form of auxiliary hypotheses that can be modified to protect the core of the theory, and (3) Series of theories that show the continuity and development of theories in the research program. This approach is not only relevant in the natural and social sciences, but also makes a major contribution to the development of Islamic science. With an integrative approach, Lakatos' thinking is able to offer a strong, logical, and flexible philosophical framework to advance science in a multidisciplinary and transformative manner.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amir Aziz, Ahmad. 2006. “Pemikiran Imre Lakatos (1922-1974) Tentang Metodologi Program Riset Dan Signifikansinya Dalam Kajian Keislaman.” 42 ISLAMICA. Vol. 1.

Barker, P., & Gholson, B. (1984). The History of the Psychology of Learning as a Rational Process: Lakatos Versus Kuhn. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 18(C), 227–244.

Biyanto (2013). “Positivisme dan Non-Positivisme dalam Jurisprudensi”. Teosofi: Jurnal Tasawuf dan Pemikiran Islam, Volume 3 Nomor 2 Desember. 483-502

Frankel, H. (1979). The career of continental drift theory: An application of Imre Lakatos’ analysis of scientific growth to the rise of drift theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 10(1).

Groves, Teddy. 2016. “Lakatos’s Criticism of Carnapian Inductive Logic Was Mistaken.” In Journal of Applied Logic, 14:3–21.

Guna Falwa Saka Ahmad dan Ramadhan Fitri (2020), Jurnal Metodologi Program Riset Imre Lakatos, P-ISSN2620-861X, E-ISSN 2620-8628. 132.

Joao, Lazandir, and D A Silva. 2024. “Imre Lakatos e a Possibilidade de Interpretação de Elementos Da Biologia Imre Lakatos and the Possibility of Interpretation of Elements of Biology.”

John Wettersten, “Searching for the Holy in the Ascent of Imre Lakatos”, Phil. Sos. Sci., 34 (2004), 84-150; P. Freguglia. “Historiography and epistemology in Lakatos” (Italian). In Epistemology of mathematics: 1989-1991 Seminars (Rome, 1992).

Kuntowijoyo (2006). Islam sebagai Ilmu: Epistemologi, Metodologi dan Etika. Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana.

Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (1974). Falsification and The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes dalam Criticism and The Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

M. Amin Abdullah (1992) “Aspek Epistemologis Filsafat Islam”, dalam Irma Fatimah (ed.), Filsafat Islam. Yogyakarta: LESFI.

Motterlini, Matteo. 2002. “Reconstructing Lakatos: A Reassessment of Lakatos’ Epistemological Project in the Light of the Lakatos Archive.” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. Vol. 33.

Muslih, Mohammad. 2020. “Filsafat Ilmu Imre Lakatos Dan Metodologi Pengembangan Sains Islam.” Tasfiyah 4 (1): 46..

Mustansyir, Rizal. 2007. “Program Riset Ilmiah Imre Lakatos.” Jurnal Filsafat. Vol. 17.

Ode, La, Ismail Ahmad, Muhammad Amri, Lc M Ag, Drs H Syamsul Qamar, and M I Th. n.d. “Modern Dalam Islam Konsep, Tokoh Dan Organisasi.” Semesta Aksara. Makasar.

Pembelajaran, Strategi, Berbasis Proyek Dalam, Pembelajaran Pendidikan, Agama Islam, and Kata Kunci. 2024. “Alkarim : Jurnal Pendidikan, Psikologi Dan Studi Islam 9 (2): 66–70.

P. Ernest. “The legacy of Lakatos: reconceptualising the philosophy of mathematics”. Philos. Math. (3) 5 (2-3) (1997).

Pervez Hoodbhoy (1996). Ikhtiar Menegakkan Rasionalitas: Antara Sains dan Ortodoksi Islam, (Terj. Sari Meutia). Bandung: Mizan.

Ridhatullah, (2020). “Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes Imre Lakatos”. At-Turas: Jurnal Studi Keislaman. 7(2). 2460-1063.

Richard E. Palmer (1969). Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer. (London: Evanston).

Riyanto, W. F. (2016). Filsafat Ilmu Topik-Topik Epistimologi. Yogyakarta: Integrasi Interkoneksi Press.

Rudy C Tarumingkeng, (2024). “Imre Lakatos.” RUDYCT e-press: Bogor.

Thomas Uebel (1995). ‘Vienna Circle’, dalam Robert Audi (ed.), Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Waryani Fajar Riyanto (2013). “Pengembangan Kurikulum Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman di PTAI (Sebuah Ikhtiar Pencarian Landasan Filosofi)”. Forum Tarbiyah. Vol. 11. No. 2 Desember.

Worral, J., & Currie, G. (1989). Falsification and The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes dalam The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zainuddin Maliki (2003). Narasi Agung: Tiga Teori Sosial Hegemonik. Surabaya: LPAM.

Zubaedi. (2007). Filsafat Barat: Dari Logika Baru Rene Descartes Hingga Revolusi Sains. Yogyakarta: Ar-Ruzz Media.