Introduction

Humanity issues have always been exciting issues to talk about. Various thinkers sparked so many human values at different times. These values can influence human survival and give birth to something that always lives in every life.

Thought, study, and practical action over time. Every human being covets human values to create an orderly, dynamic, and progressive order. These human values are expected not only to describe ideal living

conditions but also to manifest in a more tangible form in every aspect of human life.

Humanity problems consistently arise in human encounters. These encounters occur with other people or other ethnic groups and within their ethnic groups. This is as experienced in the lives of indigenous Papuans. Indigenous Papuans are one of the ethnic groups in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. The ethnic group has 251 tribes that inhabit Papua in seven tribal areas, namely the Mamta/Tabi customary area, the Saireri customary area, the Doberai customary area, the Bomberai customary area, the Anim Ha/Ha Anim familiar territory, the La Pago familiar territory and the Me Pago familiar territory.

�With different ethnic backgrounds, it can affect their lives in meeting each other, especially differences in language to communicate, different customary customs in marriage, such as the payment of a dowry for the Miyah tribe in the Doberai traditional area with different eastern cloth from the Biak tribe in the Saireri customary area, paying with a hanging plate. Moreover, the customs of war between different tribes in the pattern of war, such as the Asmat tribe, the Anim Ha customary area with a different headhunting system, from the Dani tribe in the La Pago customary area using a guerrilla warfare system. Seeing the differences in the lives of Papuans does not mean creating conflict between them, but rather an appreciation in the process of life. It becomes their cultural wealth as an ethical encounter that is always passed in their lives.

The presence of Papuan students in study cities in Indonesia did not come empty-handed but brought their cultural life struggles. Likewise, their presence in Malang City is where ethical encounters occur with others, other people, other fellows. The encounter is not just with fellow races but with different mentalities, cultures, religions, ethnicities, and characters' backgrounds. The encounter of these differences must be built, shaped, and managed appropriately to create a humane life. The encounter is not to dominate, oppress, suppress, but to meet as a brotherhood that respects another. The ethical encounter was born in the dynamics of life, both personally and with others. Encounters always occur in small or large groups, within their tribe or with other tribes, or within a country (Heidegger, 1962).

In ethical encounters, of course, there are problems as experienced by Papuan students recently in study cities outside Papua. Two places can be seen the emergence of problems faced, namely first, where to live, and second, the campus world. First is the problem of housing where people do not want to accept or even reject Papuan students boarding at their place. The refusal was caused by unscrupulous students who often drank alcohol until they were drunk and made a fuss, the wrong image of the evil Papuans through electronic media, and students who often protested demanding a referendum on an independent Papua. Here it becomes clear that other people's recognition of Papuan students is limited to calculating moral values, namely sound and evil, not appreciation because humans express their strengths and weaknesses. Second, problems on campus, such as when a lecturer asks a Papuan student to explain, but the lecturer does not understand because of the fast speech style and unclear articulation. The Indonesian language is not correct (Husserl & Moran, 2002).

On the other hand, Papuan students also have difficulty hearing explanations from lecturers because of the dialect of the language, and the case examples used are mainly from the Java region. In addition to having problems with their lecturers, they also have problems with their fellow students. When forming groups in assignments, students always choose the same race or ethnicity, so Papuan students form separate groups. This shows that Papuan students have not received proper recognition as human beings from others. Papuan students are still considered second-class and unable to think. The award is given not as a human but taking into account race and ethnicity. Here emerges different ideologies and tends to be hostile, not differences in Knowledge of something natural but respect for human dignity is the highest value. Seeing racial or ethnic differences can make Papuan students inevitably have to take responsibility for their lives in ethical encounters with others. Responsibilities built on existing differences can provide space for mutual respect for one another or view each other as brothers and not enemies. Humans are awarded an award for what they are in all their differences.

Differences that cause human problems make Levinas invite everyone to be ethically responsible for others. This means that each other is a subject in himself, as it is and in its differences. The others are recognized and left in their absolute self and otherness in that difference. The existence of Papuan students and others has a place of its own. The existence of self and this way of looking at others brings ethical consequences in living together.

Principles, views of life, beliefs, identities, races that become sources of self-identity tend to give birth to expressions that despise the "Other," often even negate the "Other." Here, it becomes clear that acknowledging differences is not enough in the diversity of life. However, more than that, namely acknowledging and providing living space for the existence of others and seriously building coexistence built based on trust and the spirit of togetherness.

In the context of the lives of Papuan students today, the ethical encounter is still relevant. Problems that often occur in ethical encounters with others will be overcome by a pattern of ethical responsibility, where everyone can respect each other as much as himself. When Papuan students can develop ethical responsibilities, their world of life will be peaceful, where they respect each other as themselves and vice versa (Churchill & Reynolds, 2014).

A. ETHICAL ENJOYMENT FROM A THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

1. Other Faces of Ethics Emmanuel Levinas's Perspective

In philosophy, Levinas' alterity is based on existential experience, namely the experience of a concrete encounter with another. The other is first seen through his Face." (Pandor, 2015) For Levinas, the Face is not a simple physical form. It transcends all ontological categories. The Face is present in his refusal to be grabbed. The Face becomes a sign of the Other, which challenges a person to get out of his subjectivity, greet him and meet him ethically.

According to Levinas, there are "three ethical moments of the epiphany: The first moment is in the uprightness of the Face, which shows nakedness and helplessness. The second moment of the Face's epiphany is found in its relationship with the Other, which invites interpellation, a kind of ethical relationship that the ego cannot avoid when meeting the Other's Face. The third moment of the Epiphany of the Face is the Face making demands on me. It is seen as the place of revelation of the majesty of the Infinite. The Infinite cannot be understood without a relationship with Him who appears as a face.� (Pandor, 2015).

With this in mind, it can mark a significant shift from ontology to ethics, from ego-centered history to the history that initiated the birth of the other. The tendency "all Western thought has been building a whole that makes the ego as the center." (Levinas, 1979) He saw "the infinity successfully broke the totality. Here, he sees an irreducible reality in oneself (as ego) and knowledge (Levinas, 1979). That infinity is "the other," the other, which is different from me and which I am not.

�This is where according to him, �The Other is the opening of the horizon of human existence, even the breaker towards human transcendentality. Humans are essentially alienated or aliens from each other. To bridge that gap, he offers what he calls an ethical encounter. The encounter in question is an encounter with another. The other is another person, a fellow human being, another person in the nobility of his dignity. Others can also mean those who want to be fully embraced, not imagined as objects whose alterity can be understood as the Wholly Other (Levinas, 1979).

For him, "The Other is always understood in the metaphysics of presence which can display something exterior, transcendent, the Infinite, which transcends consciousness and the world of the ego. However, the Other is not an alter-ego, not an ego exhibiting another form. It is completely different. Others are immigrants, foreigners (stranger)" (Levinas, 1979).

�� Understanding the presence of the other is an ethical imperative to be responsible for it. Levinas says: "We are all responsible for everyone else - but I am more responsible than all the others." (Peperzak, 2013) This means responsibility is a reality that I can take responsibility for every time I meet the Other. "Others are present in the epiphany of faces that are naked and sublime and at the same time contain an ethical invitation to take responsibility." This thought can "criticize Descartes' thought about the cogito which is aware of itself so that it makes modern nuances as egology (Levinas, 1979). Cogito sum should be replaced with Respondeo ergo sum that I am responsible, so I exist" (Bertens, 2006).

This can explain that the ethical responsibility that Levinas is referring to is first, seeing the "face" as a starting point for relationships (Pandor, 2015). The Face is not in the biological-anatomical sense but the Face as a condition in which "openness to the other's otherness is not trapped in the box of egoism, but directs oneself to the Other with all its otherness." (Peperzak, 2013). This means that when that Face greets, I can no longer be indifferent to it but respond to it. The meaning of the Face is in itself which means that the Face is "a priori"; precedes all our perceptions. Other people's faces can also represent the "Infinite." The other person's Face is more than what is rationally understood. Second, the Other is 'master.' It means "in the Face of another person can give absolute orders to maintain his life. When another person appears as a face, we have no power over him. When it comes to the Other, I cannot be free anymore. The look on her Face will hold me hostage to take responsibility for it." Third, relate to other people as an "asymmetrical relationship, which means that others have always required me. The other person appears from a high place.� (Levinas, 1979).

For Levinas, the Face of the Other is a call for me to accept it. His vocation is ethical in that it obliges me in such a way as to be responsible for the Other. I wish all the subjectivity in me is responsible for the Other. This means "opening yourself up to other human beings as a top priority." (Pandor, 2015) In that situation, I am entirely passive because I have preceded the possibility of active action. Against that other, I cannot do anything, so I am "hostage," which allows me to be responsible for it even though I have not taken any attitude towards him.

2. Phenomenology of Edmund Husserl

A phenomenology is an approach used "to see phenomena or what appears. It means an analysis of the symptoms that flood human consciousness (Bagus, 2005). Here, it shows that phenomenology is "the study of the essence of consciousness so that there are at least two assumptions. First, every human experience is an expression of consciousness. Someone is experiencing something.

He is aware of his own experience, which is subjective. Second, every form of consciousness is always the awareness of something. Husserl calls intentionality, namely that consciousness is always the awareness of something. This means "experience cannot be separated from being experienced, subject and object are united so that nothing is realized without something being realized. This means that something can be trusted, namely human consciousness. Here the important thing to learn is awareness, so that this is what brings him back to the object itself, back to the things of the mind, the phenomenon of consciousness (back to the things of the mind, the phenomena of consciousness) (Donny, 2010).

Here, it shows that a person's action is intentional if carried out with a clear purpose. Intentionality is related to the purpose of human action and is also the essential character of the mind itself. Thought is never thought itself but is always thought of something. The mind always has an object. The same applies to consciousness. Intentionality is the directedness of consciousness.

Moreover, intentionality is also the directionality of action, namely action aimed at one object. Here, most human experience involves awareness, and consciousness is always an awareness of something. Husserl called "any process of consciousness directed at something as an action (act). Moreover, every human action is always within the framework of habits (habits), including body movements and ways of thinking (Ms & Salim, 2006).

This effort led him to �the idea of phenomenological reduction, namely placing the reality of things outside of us (epoche) so that only the content of consciousness is clear. The transcendence of the object itself (das Ding a Sich) can never be a real proof." �(Ms & Salim, 2006) Here he abandons the scientific attitude (natural attitude) without hesitation, seeing things as things, not as mere phenomena of consciousness (hence the so-called 'phenomenological reduction' unlike Descartes, who begins with universal doubts). However, only phenomenological reduction alone is insufficient because we see the symptoms are always particular. Husserl "tried to find an understanding of universal phenomena, general things such as humanity, freedom and so on, which he sought using eidetic reduction: wherein the imagination all the differences of several particulars are put aside so that only one essence remains. He was looking for a basis that could not be doubted. Here it is understood to understand consciousness as experienced from a first-person perspective (Ms & Salim, 2006).

Here it can be seen that "phenomenology is an attempt to understand consciousness from the subjective point of view of the person concerned. This approach is, of course, different from the neuroscience approach, which seeks to understand the workings of human consciousness in the brain and nerves using the observer's point of view. Neuroscience sees the phenomenon of consciousness as a biological phenomenon. In contrast, the phenomenological description sees the human experience as he experiences it, namely from the first-person point of view. Although it focuses on the subjective experience of the first person, phenomenology does not stop at merely describing sensory feelings. Sensory experience is only the starting point for conceptual meaning, more profound than the sensory experience itself. The conceptual meaning can be in imagination, thoughts, desires, or specific feelings when people experience the world personally. By experiencing it, the world can analyze the essence of consciousness as it is lived and experienced by humans and is seen from the first-person point of view (Engkus, 2009). The analysis that can be seen is by analyzing the structure of perception, imagination, judgment, emotion, evaluation, and the experience of others that are directed at something outside.

Finally, the focus of phenomenology "is not the particular experience, but the structure of the conscious experience, namely the objective reality that manifests in each person's subjective experience. Here, the focus is on objective reality's subjective meaning in the consciousness of people who live their daily life activities. In Husserl's vocabulary, "the object of consciousness as experienced." Alternatively, "in Husserlian logic, every human being with and in his experience having valid knowledge is confirmed by the metaphysical idea of his student, Martin Heidegger, who said that man is "being-in-the-World" (Being-in-the-World). If humans exist (being) in the world, humans are humans. Because of their experience, they are producers of Knowledge and the domain of Knowledge itself (Riyanto, 2011).

3. The Symbolic Interaction of George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer

Symbolic interaction is an interaction that is built with the interpretation of meaning. The interpretation of the meaning in question is a symbolic interaction that contains "subjective meaning" of human behavior, social processes, and pragmatism. With this interpretation, "Blumer expresses three premises that underlie symbolic interactionism: first, humans act towards things based on the meanings that things have for them. Second, the meaning comes from one's social interactions with other people. Third, these meanings are perfected during the process of social interaction. Thus, symbolic interaction assumes that humans understand things by learning from experience. A person's perception is always translated into symbols. A meaning is learned through interactions among people.

(Engkus, 2009) Here humans actively shape their behavior. This means that the study of society must be the study of collective action and that society is the result of symbolic interaction. According to the stimulus-response model, humans interpret or limit each of their actions and not just react to each other (Engkus, 2009). A person does not directly respond to others but is based on the understanding given to individual actions. Blumer believes that human interaction is bridged by the use of symbols, interpretations, and the certainty of meaning from the actions of others. There is no priority of group dominance or structure. However, to see group acts as a collection of individual actions, society must be seen as consisting of the actions of people and society's life consisting of that person's actions.

Mead explains that "the human can respond to symbols between them when interacting to understand symbols about themselves. A person can make himself the object of his actions and those of others. The mechanism of a person so that he can see himself as an object is through role-taking by involving the communication process through speech and action movements. This self-development coincides with the development of his ability to take a role. Here interaction is the process by which thinking skills are developed and demonstrated. All kinds of interactions enlarge the human capacity to think. In most interactions, actors must pay attention to others and determine when and how to adapt their activities.

The world of interaction is a world of facts that emphasizes the world's life based on the subjective-practical experience of humans when they are born, life and death, experiences of love and hate, hope and despair, suffering and joy, ignorance and wisdom (Keraf & Dua, 2001). The world of experience is a subjective, practical, and situational everyday world. Interaction is seen as a symbol of the everyday world that describes human life in the reality of life experiences. The experiences experienced are greetings, work, sports, illness, health, and interacting with others.

4. Existentialism and humanism in the Perspective of Jean-Paul Sartre

Sartre's humanist existentialism "was born as a challenge to the philosophical school that adheres to idealism and materialism. The philosophy of idealism culminating in Hegel says that humans are nothing more than "spirits" that are developing and moving towards self-perfection. According to Hegel, humans are not individuals who have autonomy and existence but are merely a process of self-perfection from the spirit to become absolute. Here, humans do not reflect a concrete life because their meaning and position are absorbed in absolute spirit consciousness (Donny, 2010).

Similarly, materialists argue that humans are nothing more than matter above human consciousness (Suseno, 2013). Departing from the above idea, Sartre argues that idealist and materialist philosophers have reduced human nature as an individual who exists in the dialectical process of spirit and material consciousness. According to Sartre, humans can never be reduced to the reality of spirit and matter because humans are the only creatures aware of themselves as free and existential individuals.

5. Sartre thought that man is freedom.

The concept of freedom that flows from Sartre cannot be understood apart from his ideas about the way humans exist in the world (Sugiyono, 2017), which he radically describes in two forms, namely "etre-pour-soi (being-for-itself) and etre-en-soi (being-for-itself). -in-itself). According to Sartre, humans are the only creatures that exist, meaning that humans are not something conceptual but something actual. Here, existence first departs from humans as subjects. This means that human existence is not the same as other objects because human existence does not result from something determined but a denial of a specific object. This understanding departs from what was sparked by Sartre, that existence precedes essence.

That is, humans were there first and then existed. There is a new existence to understand that humans were initially empty. However, because of his free choice, a man came into being. In other words, human freedom to choose makes emptiness exist. Existence means acting according to my choice as the only free individual. Thus, it can be said that humans "exist" insofar as they act on something for themselves, and what they do for themselves is born from their freedom and consciousness as an individual who realizes something meaningful to them.

Method

This research approach is qualitative. This approach is intended to examine natural objects and the researcher as the vital instrument. According to Sugiyono, qualitative research examines natural objects and places researchers as critical instruments. The sampling method of qualitative research data sources is purposive and snowball, the collection technique is triangulation (combined), the data analysis is inductive or qualitative, and the results of qualitative research emphasize meaning rather than generalization. This approach can be used to explore the subjective meaning of the subjects in seeing the reality they experience.

This type of research is phenomenological research. This research uses descriptive phenomenological research. The researcher uses this research to explore the nature and pure awareness of the subjects about the experience of the encounter, which is the space for ethical encounters with other faces. Edmund Husserl puts phenomena in a scientific approach to see phenomena or what appears. Appearance through analysis of the symptoms that flood human consciousness. Therefore, this research process will be a patterned encounter method using observation, in-depth interviews, and documentation as reference data.

This research was conducted among students who live in dormitories belonging to the Papuan government in Malang City. Papuan students are �the face of the future of Papua� in various fields of life in the future. This study looks at the �Ethical Encounter with Another Face in the lives of Papuan students in Malang City. Ethical encounters with other faces became the locus of this research.

A. Data Analysis Techniques

Data analysis is a stage of organizing and sorting data into patterns, categories, and fundamental units of description to make it easier to determine themes and formulate working hypotheses according to the data. This stage can be used to analyze data to simplify the data into a form that is easier to read and interpret. This data is also put to good use in order to be able to answer the problems posed in the research. This analysis is based on field observations or practical experience based on data obtained from interviews, observations, and documentation, then compiled to conclude. Therefore, data analysis is a process of systematically searching and compiling data obtained from interviews, field notes, and observations by organizing data into categories, breaking it down into units, synthesizing, compiling into patterns, sorting out which ones. are critical, and concluding so that they can be understood by themselves and others.

B. Data Validity

Researchers tested the validity of the data using the credibility test, dependability test, transferability test, and confirmability test. Credibility is understood as checking data through a triangulation process in the form of its source, method, and time.

Results and Discussion

A. Data Exposure

Papuan students have an existence that can describe their world of life. The picture of life is the Face of Papuan students in ethical encounters with other faces. Knowing the existence of Papuan students in ethical encounters with other faces can be seen from their identity, background, how they are responsible in ethical encounters with others, what programs support ethical encounters with other faces, what are the challenges in ethical encounters with another face, what is the meaning of an ethical encounter with another face, what life experiences can be drawn. All of these existences can flow from the following passages:

1. Subject Identity

Subjects that can be studied, observed, and explored their life struggles about ethical encounters with other faces are Papuan students in the city of Malang. Papuan students describe an existence with its ethnicity, culture, religion, and background. They have their world in reality, a reality, no falsehood. They realize that they are Papuan children in the reality of life in Malang City, namely Tomas Yerin, a 3rd-semester student of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences at the Merdeka University (UNMER), living in the Tambrauw student dormitory on Tlogomas Street, a Protestant Christian, the Malik tribe, Neorits Yesnat, a 5th-semester student. Faculty of Tourism at Merdeka University (UNMER), lives in the Tambraw student dormitory on Tlogomas Street, Catholic, Malik tribe, Maria Sedik 1st semester student at the Faculty of Nursing, Tribuana Tungga Dewi University (UNITEC), lives in UNITRI campus student dormitory Jalan Joyo Mulyo Merjosari, religious Catholic, Miyah ethnic, Novela Bonepai, 5th-semester student at the Faculty of Arts and Letters, State University of Malang (UNM), living in a student dormitory in the Arfak Mountains on Bandahara-Dieng Road, Protestant Christian, Manipur tribe and Philipus Dwansiba, 1st-semester student of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences at Merdeka University (UNMER), lives in the Arfa Mountain student dormitory k Jalan Bandahara Dieng, Christian Kimi, Myah tribe.

The five of them come from different tribes, but they are under the same customary territory, namely the Domberai customary area. This can illustrate that they have almost the same customary sources. However, in the struggle of life, they have different experiences. The struggle of life experienced in Papua is that there are tribes who know science first and others who know it from behinds, such as the Meyah and Mpur tribes who first received the light of Zending. In contrast, the Malik and Miyah tribes received the Catholic mission from behind. This experience shows how the development of life is different from one another. The differences they experience make them struggle to compete with other tribes. They struggle with how to get to school to college, live healthily, and learn to live with other tribes so that they can develop well. From the struggles they experienced, they gave them the strength to live together with other Papuan brothers. The strength always visible is the togetherness and brotherhood of life that is passed together.

The life struggles experienced from encounters between the tribes in Papua give the strength to live with other tribes, such as the original tribe who have a pattern of living together, having fun together, and eating and drinking together, which each of them always lives differently. With what they encountered in the city of Malang, where life emphasizes individualism and does not care about other people, for example, when they see other people in trouble. Race differences become a struggle in itself, as they encounter questions about why curly hair, not wet showers, and why black skin. These questions show differences in identity between Papuans and others and at the same time offend Papuans. With these questions, they realize that they are different from other people. They can make the experience of the differences in their lives as a history of their life journey in the city of Malang.

2. Ethical Responsibilities

Responsibility becomes the primary basis in establishing an encounter with another face. These encounters make them feel they have to be responsible for their life activities, both with themselves and with other people. The ethical responsibilities that can be seen are the awareness born from oneself in building togetherness in life with others. They are aware that as foreigners, they have a purpose here of going to school learn to adapt to different situations, so they have to take care of other people's feelings and are afraid to be called rude, so they have to study the situation in Malang.

This awareness is revealed from themselves, such as Thomas: "I am a foreigner in other people's land, so I have to respect the people here, I do not play with power, Neorits: "I have a purpose here of going to school, I do not want to disturb other people's lives, good friends and people here," Maria: "I just came here so I was afraid of the situation in this new place, so I learned to adapt, I learned to manage myself because I live in a campus dormitory with friends from other parts of Indonesia," Novela: "The situation here is different with Papua, so I have to calmly study, work on assignments, do not want to disturb other people, I take care of their feelings, so they do not get offended. "Philips: "I just came with the original Papuan style. I am afraid that people here will not say I am rude, so I calm down and learn the situation here to respect the people here". Here it becomes clear that in their life, they know who they are, where they are, and with whom they are building a life. They make the reality of their lives a place where the encounter takes place, not something born outside of themselves.

Second, live the daily schedule in the dormitory, which is their life activity. They can control themselves and their activities by making a schedule. They feel that making personal schedules is very important as what was revealed from them: Tomas: "I am in a dormitory there are no shared rules, so I have to set my schedule, when I wake up and when I study in order to maintain calm with other friends, respect other friends while studying, I do not play music, Neorits: "I used to live in high school in a Catholic girls' dormitory, which was orderly, there was a shared schedule, and there was a coach, here the government only prepared a house for us to live in, but managed ourselves individually and made me responsible for me. Alone, by keeping the dormitory atmosphere calm so that they can study and other friends can also study", Maria: "I live in a campus dorm, but we take care of ourselves, so I do not want to disturb other friends, so I make my study schedule," Novela: "I maintain order at home here so that other friends can study and I can study myself so I have made my schedule," P Philips: "I saw that the dormitory only had a dorm leader, but there was no shared daily schedule, so I made my schedule." With a schedule of activities in dormitories and campuses ethically, they can be responsible for what they will do.

Here they can be responsible for themselves and other friends in their life together. They do not see their friends as people who interfere with their lives but see them as what they are with their existence and activities. They also see other friends as relatives who live in the same house with various backgrounds so that they do not interfere with each other or force their will but respect it.

Third, relationships with others in the neighborhood. Their lives are inseparable from the environment or society around them. They feel responsible for each other or the people around them. The awareness that they already have that they are in someone else's place and the life experiences of Papuan students who are imaged as drunks and troublemakers make them feel responsible for eliminating such an image by maintaining an atmosphere of calm. They maintain more calm in delivering greetings, such as good morning, excuse me, or an event they report to the head of the RT.

They have not or do not build relationships beyond that because they are busy with their studies, as they said: Thomas: "Papuans are usually said to be drunks and make a mess, so I have to take care that they do not tell me I am the same way so they can say hello morning or afternoon," Neortis: "if we have an event we go and report to the RT head so as not to disturb the neighbors around us," Maria: "I just came, only people can say hello or good afternoon," Novela: " I am busy with my studies so they can say congratulations," Philipus: "I often congratulate those I meet around my house." With this information, it can be seen that the built encounters are only for the sake of interest, not as a routine as citizens involved in social actions.

Fourth is the world of campus. They realize that many friends come from various regions and backgrounds, so they are always calm in building relationships. When building relationships with them, sometimes they are afraid that their friends will be offended or that they will also be offended by their statements, such as Tomas: "I want to ask a question, I am afraid that a different language dialect will offend them, so do not worry." This expression was also revealed from the other four friends. In addition, they also relate to lecturers. The relationship that is built is only limited to asking lecture materials that are not understood because the lecturers have different dialects and often use Javanese language or examples from Java. Here they do not rebel against such situations, but they learn to accept the reality and these differences or respect the existing process, like Novela: "I learned to respect and accept these differences so if I do not understand the material I will ask the lecturer," Neorits: "I do not understand the material or assignments, I ask the lecturers or friends, as well as friends who do not understand they also ask me, I do not feel offended or embarrassed by the situation I am in." The campus world leads them more to the relationship between lectures, materials, Knowledge, and meeting with various friends from existing backgrounds. They do not see this difference as a threat to their lives, but it enriches them to learn and appreciate their friends for who they are, and vice versa. Their friends accept them as they are. Here it becomes clear that the encounter experienced is not to oppress or force the will but to respect one another for what it is.

3. Supporting Programs

In their life experience, some signs are used as the basis for the ethical encounter. The researchers found several answers from the interview results, namely first, the same answer about looking back at the background of why they came to Malang city, as they said: "We are here for school or college, so we are responsible for that." With such a background, they can maintain relationships with anyone they meet so that their lives and studies can run well. They first came to Malang not to fight against the people here but to study or study here. With this, they can respect the people as they are, following the people's rules here, precisely where they live. They see that their situation is not something that binds or oppresses them, but something that facilitates their lives as they are.

�Second, sticking to the schedule that has been made is very important to determine their steps, as they say, Thomas: "my life depends on the schedule," Neorits: "the schedule that I make helps me," Maria: "schedule governs my life," Novela: " schedule became a signpost for me," Philip: "schedule became a new direction in my life." With a schedule, they know what and when to do something, such as what time to study at home, how to communicate with friends or on campus when to study, when to do group work with friends, or even involvement in campus organizations. The schedule helps them relate to anyone they meet in their activities. They see schedules not as frightening, oppressive, and overpowering but as a means of smoothing their existence. They become people who can appreciate what they make and respect themselves.

Third, discussion of lecture material. In the discussion of lecture material, it was seen that they saw mutual respect for the opinions of others, even though there were many differences of opinion. They feel that respect for opinions conveyed by respect for people can be conveyed as expressed by them, Thomas: "When discussing lecture material, friends listen to what I have to say," Neorits: "Friends understand what I say, Maria: "I understand what my friends are saying even with their dialect," Novela: "I am limited in language, my friends understand what I am saying," Philip: "I slowly understand what my friends and lecturers are saying." Here, intellectual dynamics are built that give birth to an appreciation for each other with their limitations. They value their friends, and their friends value them in the discussion process.

Fourth, student organizations. In student organizations on campus, they can learn practical Knowledge. With such involvement, they finally get the responsibility as administrators as well. Learning to organize helps them appreciate others for who they are, and they are also respected. From the experiences that were revealed, such as Thomas: "I joined a faculty organization in order to increase my knowledge." Neuritis: "I became the second secretary in a faculty organization," Maria: "I plan to study organization next year," Novela: "I joined the Christian student organization (GMKI) to build relationships with other friends," Philip: "I just registered to follow the Christian Organization (GMKI)." By seeing this experience, they want to show that they feel helped from the personality and intellectual side. Here to help those who understand and appreciate others in life. By organizing, they have sufficient practical Knowledge and can communicate with other friends to give birth to a comprehensive understanding to appreciate other friends as they are.

4. Challenges faced

The journey of life is inseparable from the challenges that are often faced. The challenges that arise for the four of them are, first, adjustment difficulties. Adjustment due to coming from a family and living in a hostel that is not their world, from the beginning to build a life of my own, as Novela said: "I come from a direct family and live in a dormitory, this is difficult for me because I have to adjust again" or Neorits: "I am In high school I lived in an orderly dormitory, and there was a coach, but now in a dormitory with a new pattern, it makes me adjust again." With a new lifestyle, they can build something new for their lives. The new pattern can cause them to appreciate themselves and the others they meet. Such appreciation proves that they can accept the new Face of life by self-regulating.

Second, they are afraid of being rejected because of the incidents of other Papuan students who often get drunk and make a mess, as they say: "At first, people thought that Papuan children were all drunk and made a mess." Here, they are afraid to take a step, but they are also accepted with their pattern of greeting respecting other neighbors.

Third, language, meaning that dialect differences can create doubts in building relationships. Here, they feel inferior that other friends or lecturers will laugh at them, so they want to ask questions, and they are afraid to ask questions, like Philipus: "I just came here with the original dialect, so I want to ask questions later, people will laugh at me." With different languages and dialects, they are afraid to take steps. This incident was also experienced by the other four in their lectures.

Fourth is arrogance, meaning they feel that their friends from other areas are superior to others. Here they just give in to the situation, so they do what they can, just like Novela: "Amber's friends think you are great, so other people are not great, so I love you guys, what is important is that I study well." In everyday life, they often meet arrogant friends. The arrogant attitude of friends makes them sometimes feel irritated and discouraged, but they can accept this attitude to understand other people with their attitude in life. This experience can be experienced by the other four as well.

Fifth, the tendency to choose their ethnicity in group work, so that they are forced to choose friends who can understand them, as they say: "Your friends, if the assignment is from your lecturer, choose your friends or your tribe, so I have to find my ethnic group friends. or other friends who understand our discussion or group work". This tendency makes them able to understand the attitudes and behavior of others to be able to appreciate it.

5. Understanding yourself in an Ethical Encounter

In human life, all aim to find the meaning of life. The meaning of life is valuable and internalized, making an individual feel valued and reason to live and establish himself. These five speakers gave meaning to their lives by meeting others in the city of Malang. There are four meanings that can be seen as follows:

B. Respect for others

From the ethical encounters they have gone through in their lives, it can be said that respect for others is fundamental in building a life together. This is revealed, as Tomas: "if I do not respect other people, it is impossible for me to survive here until now," Neorits: "I have to respect other people before people respect me," Maria: "I am also human, and everyone is also human, so we mutual respect," Novela: "I respect myself then respect others," Philipus: "I am a human being who has feelings to respect others, I cannot possibly hate."

Their response shows that respecting someone is the highest value that must be maintained. Appreciation cannot be bought but can be done and lived, that is the stated belief.

C. Life is not alone

In the course of their life in Malang, they feel that they are not alone. There are other people. When they are having trouble eating and drinking in the dormitory, having trouble with college materials, having trouble paying semester fees, all of these difficulties can be helped by their friends. Vice versa they help their friends, such as Neorits: I am from Toraja helping me later I will be replaced", Thomas: "If I do not eat I eat with other friends in the hostel," Maria: "If I am sick my friends help me buy medicine at the pharmacy." Novela: "If I do not have money, I will take a photocopy later. Friends from Ternate will often help Me." Philips: "I just arrived at a friend in the dormitory to help me take care of registration on campus."

Here they see the act of helping friends confirms that human life is not alone. There are still others. Life experiences are not alone, and they are not only experienced when they are challenging but also when they are happy to be with other friends as they say: Neorits: "it is happy when celebrating birthdays with friends," Thomas: "I am happy when friends invite to eat," Novela: "I like it when I can go with other friends for work assignments or recreation," Philipus: "I like it when a friend invites me to play futsal," Maria: "I like being involved in the church choir." The problematic and happy experiences they experience make them feel that this life is not alone but also involves other people. Their lives can not be separated from the intervention of others.

Knowledge of culture

From their life encounters, they can see that there is new Knowledge about other people's cultures. They realized that they could accept other cultures in overseas places. The culture they encounter leads them to respect other people, such as Thomas: "I used to think that Java was all the same, but East Java is different from Central Java." Neuritis: "I am happy to meet friends from other places. I can know their ethnicity and customs or their accent." Maria: "Here I have to learn to be subtle in language and behavior� Novela: "I only understand and appreciate Javanese people now, after meeting them in person." Philips: "People here, we jabber. You do not understand".

Experience in communicating leads them to see culture as new knowledge in their learning process. Cultural encounters can lead each of them to know and appreciate the differences that exist.

D. Science

The Knowledge gained is something that gives meaning to their lives. They feel that the Knowledge gained is sometimes tricky, but they feel that they have learned something new from the learning process, such as Thomas: "I studied political science, now I know how the politics of this country are." Neuritis: "I study tourism so that I know and can preserve tourism. That is where I have a place." Maria: "I am deepening my nursing knowledge to take care of the Papuan people later." Novela: "I studied art, and now I know how to develop the art of dance where I live in the future." Philips: "I am new to political science, but it is interesting for me to see the politics that is developing in my area now."

This response is their experience in learning so far. Their lessons were not alone but met with other friends and lecturers who helped them. Such an encounter leads them to feel that the encounter carries its meaning, namely gaining Knowledge that is useful for the future of their lives.

The formulation of the meaning given explains the meaning born of his actions, not from other people. They respect other people, give a sense of comfort, and follow what has become their life plan. They cannot give more than that to each other, but that is the value they provide. Their respect and responsibility are sometimes rewarded with inappropriate appreciation, but they can understand and respect themselves and others for who they are.

E. Research findings

In tracing the phenomena of the lives of Papuan students in ethical encounters with others, several things were found. This encounter does not just happen but requires an awakened process to show awareness to find out what has happened. The events encountered are as follows:

1. Responsibility

In the lives of Papuan students in Malang they have many daily activities. Most of these daily activities they go through alone. They can only live together but in different campuses and different majors. This form of life requires a responsibility that can be carried out, both responsibility towards oneself in the dormitory, college, and neighborhood. The responsibility that can be given is to appreciate what has been made to run well as it is. By being responsible, they have shown their existence. Existence is the basis of their life. As Sartre said that existence precedes essence. So the responsibility is a manifestation of the existence of Papuan students in Malang.

Responsibilities built with awareness can provide space for yourself and others to develop correctly. With this awareness, one does not want to oppress or force one's will on others, but to respect it, and vice versa, others do not force their will. Here is born an understanding of an appreciation of the other Face with its existence.

Showing a responsible attitude can open other faces to appreciate Papuan students. They can say that Papuan students do not always behave badly in their lives, but there is a newness that can be shown through the relationships that have been built. This relationship makes Papuan students themselves respect themselves and others. With this award, other people can appreciate Papuan students as they are.

2. Ethical encounters that can help

In Husserl's idea, which has been seen previously, it states that "every process of consciousness that is directed at something is an action (act). And every human action is always within the framework of habits (habits), including body movements and ways of thinking. This thinking shows that one person's habits can also be useful for others. In the life situation of Papuan students with different faces, they observe each other and respond to their habits by giving and taking each other. This means that the meeting that has taken place has had a social impact on their respective lives.

The social impact that can be felt is that they receive the help of friends when they are in trouble or they help friends who are in trouble, and vice versa when they are happy, other friends are also happy. Here it can be seen that the assistance provided and the pleasure experienced together have an intrinsic impact on oneself and others. This process occurs because there has been an attitude of mutual trust and respect for each other. The help and pleasure experienced is not an act of compassion but a necessity when the other Face needs or commands something to be done.

In addition to the act of receiving help and the pleasures experienced, there was also a mental change and a new perspective from others towards the existence of Papuan students who had often been said to be drunks and troublemakers. This change in perspective cannot be separated from the results of the encounters Papuan students have with others that have been built so far in living together. With these encounters, Papuan students began to feel comfortable carrying out their activities well until now.

Helping each other and enjoying life together is a dynamic in living together. This togetherness leads each individual to be able to appreciate, accept others as they are. With this acceptance, it makes a change in perspective and acts with a new pattern of life. The new pattern of life that can be seen is that Papuan students are not afraid to meet other people and likewise other people do not think badly of Papuan students. This is where the birth of a new understanding process to respect one another.

3. Respect humanity

The experience of an ethical encounter is an experience of encountering another face. The Face of the Other is always identified with humans, so according to Levinas, "The Face is a concrete encounter with the Other. The Other first appeared through His Face. This means that the Face in question is the human Face, both oneself and others. The experience gained by Papuan students in the city of Malang is that they can show their faces as Papuans in dormitories, neighborhoods, and campuses. The faces shown are that they do not force their will on others or others. They can live their lives with respect for the lives of others so that they do not want to disturb the peace of others in their lives. They can control themselves so they do not create discord in their life together but create peace. Here they want to show that they respect human rights, which means that no one person can control the other.

By respecting each other, they can live life in the city of Malang so that they do not face significant challenges in their lives. Even though there are challenges they experience, it doesn't mean anything to their lives, because they have accepted themselves as they are and other people with their own perspective. Here arises an appreciation of the differences that exist to lead them to build a good life and run as it is. They do not impose their will on others but freedom that can be accounted for by themselves. The self will be good when it depends on yourself and vice versa, the self will be bad depending on yourself.

The respect that has occurred is born from a dynamic of life that is passed, both pleasant and unpleasant. Such experiences lead them to appreciate others with their existence. Respecting people as they are is something that is fundamental in everyone's life. Humans live not alone, but there are others. Encounters with other faces lead Papuan students to respect him for what he is.

4. Brotherhood

Meeting with another face is one way people can see themselves, as Mead said that "a person's ability to see himself as an object is through role-taking by involving the communication process through speech and action. This means that Papuan students can take a role in managing their lives by meeting other faces so that they understand how to accept and respect someone as a brother.

The encounter that has occurred and has been going on so far is not seen as an enemy but a brotherhood, as a hostel in differences, the environment and the campus. All walk and find brotherhood because they have taken their respective roles in their lives. So many differences are found in their lives both in the dormitory, neighborhood and campus. These differences are not the basis of hostility, but strengthen brotherhood. Brotherhood is built on the basis of respect for that difference, mutual acceptance and acknowledgment of that difference.

The encounter gave birth to brotherhood, thus leading them to appreciate every Face they encounter in their lives. Different faces are not an enemy but as a fact that can be appreciated for their differences. Brotherhood is an encounter between different faces with each other in the togetherness of life.

The brotherhood that is built is a way where Papuan children feel that other people are brothers and other people see Papuan students as brothers. With such a view opens a new pattern in the atmosphere of seeing oneself and others as a completely different existence. This difference leads Papuan students to accept themselves and others as happy brothers.

REFERENCES

Bagus, Loren. (2005). Kamus Filsafat, cet ke-4. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Bertens, Kees. (2006). Psikoanalisis Sigmund Freud. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Churchill, Steven, & Reynolds, Jack. (2014). Jean-Paul Sartre: Key Concepts. Routledge.

Donny, Gahral Adian. (2010). Pengantar fenomenologi. Jakarta.

Engkus, Kuswarno. (2009). Fenomenologi: Konsepsi, Pedoman, dan Contoh Penelitiannya. Bandung: Widya.

Heidegger, Martin. (1962). Being and Time, translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. New York: Harper and Row.

Husserl, Edmund, & Moran, Dermot. (2002). The shorter logical investigations. Routledge.

Keraf, A. Sonny, & Dua, Mikhael. (2001). Ilmu Pengetahuan Sebuah Tinjauan Filosofis (Vol. 22). Kanisius.

Levinas, Emmanuel. (1979). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (Vol. 1). Springer Science & Business Media.

Ms, Agus, & Salim, Teori. (2006). Paradigma Penelitian Sosial Buku Sumber untuk Penelitian Kualitatif, edisi kedua. Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana.

Pandor, Pius. (2015). Menghadirkan Wajah Gereja Berparas Kemanusiaan: Potret Gereja Menjadi. Seri Filsafat Teologi, 25(24), 233�272.

Peperzak, Adrian. (2013). Ethics as first philosophy: The significance of Emmanuel Levinas for philosophy, literature and religion. Routledge.

Riyanto, E. Armada. (2011). Berfilsafat politik. Kanisius.

Sugiyono, F. X. (2017). Instrumen Pengendalian Moneter: Operasi Pasar Terbuka (Vol. 10). Pusat Pendidikan Dan Studi Kebanksentralan (PPSK) Bank Indonesia.

Suseno, Franz Magnis. (2013). Dari Mao ke Marcuse: Percikan Filsafat Marxis Pasca-Lenin. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.