Flesh Verses Flesh

Positive aspects of the new market economy and the IT revolution is that it has made the whole Democracy can never be maintained in a uni-polar world; it can be maintained only in a pluralistic world. One of the 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.