Views and Words - Dr. K S Radhakrishnan
Democracy can never be maintained in a uni-polar
world; it can be maintained only in a pluralistic world. One of the positive
aspects of the new market economy and the IT revolution is that it has made the
whole world into a world of plurality. For ex. a man who lives in a remote
village of Kerala cannot remain aloof from the developments of other parts of this
affluent world. The so called European culture has often been accused as an inferior
stuff by the Oriental group of philosophers, writers and scholars. But today, nobody
can keep away from the influence of the so called European culture because even
without your invitation, either you like it or not, the European culture is
within the frames of your own living room. Whether you like it or not, it is
there. The other ‘now-a-days’ is very near to you in physical terms.
The question, how is it possible to get
communicated with the other who is physically very near to you, leads you to the
problem: what is common between oneself and the other. The other here can be a
religion, a system of life, a philosophy, a continent, a man with a difference
or an object with a difference. The other is too near to you either in the
virtual world or in the actual world. Since the other is too near to you, you
will be forced to get communicated with the other. The question on the tool
that helps to get communicated with the other is a fundamental question. To make
communication easier, however, that common element has to be identified and experienced.
But, this seldom happens in the present day world. This is a very serious
problem. Though we have developed too many theories on communication, the real
problem of communication is within oneself, not anything external to him. That
is what that is common between ‘I’ and ‘You’; in another sense, what is common
between oneself and the other, what is common between one religion and the other,
what is common between one continent and the other, what is common between one
philosophy and the other. If there is nothing common between one religion and
the other, the only possibility is relational conflict. If there is nothing
common between ‘I’ and ‘You’ the only possible relation is estrangement.
Estrangement means, ‘I will be really afraid
of you’. An estranged entity or an estranged person or whatever it may be, it
creates fear in human beings. So, there must be fear. So what is common between
‘I’ and ‘You’? While Jesus was teaching His philosophy and way of life, this
question was asked. When He was talking about the kingdom of God, this question
was raised. We see Him saying that what is common between you and me is the
heaven. That means that there must be heaven in you and me; there must be
something common in between you and me that makes communication possible. So
communication can be made easy and possible only when one is able to find out
the common aspect that exists in me and the other.
This
aspect has often been forgotten by the present day Western thinkers. The
present day world is too much concerned with anti-foundationalism. For example
Richard Rorty asks, “Where are the foundations? I have not seen it.” But, if
there are no foundations communication is impossible. Communications can be
possible only if there are certain foundations, which must be common for the
one and the other. That common element can be reduced to human flesh alone.
Then flesh must be able to communicate with flesh. Only the identical elements
make communication easy. If one thinks that man is flesh alone then everything that
he expresses about man must be the various dimensions of the flesh alone and everything
that can be communicated to the flesh alone. Here, the flesh communicates with
the flesh. That sort of a communication system says that man is nothing but a
lump of flesh and there may be blood also. So, if at the moment one thinks that
human beings can be reduced to flesh alone then everything that is related to
human beings must be related to the flesh also. It is here that we have to
confine ourselves to the pleasures that can be enjoyed through the sense organs.
Epicureans firmly believe that the human aim is to enjoy the maximum sensual
pleasure. The moment we admit that our aim is to enjoy the maximum pleasure,
then we have to admit that this pleasure is related to flesh alone.
To read more articles from Views and Words, kindly visit Indian Thoughts
No comments:
Post a Comment