110 SOCIAL SCIENTIST man is an incorrigible sinner; to political exponents, he is a political animal; to scientists, the sum of observation; and so on. Feuerbach's crude materialistic assertion that 'Man is what he eats' was ridiculed by Antonio Gramsci, because if it were so 'then the determining matrix of history would be the kitchen and revolutions would coincide with radical changes in the diet of the masses' (Prison Notebooks, London, 1978 p. 354). His profound quest for the search of answers to fundamental questions in an age of political turmoil and moral crisis led him to numerous subtle observations. He believed that the nature of the human species is not given by the biological nature of man. To Gramsci, human nature is the complex of social relations. It is the most satisfying answer because it includes the idea of becoming. Man 'becomes', he changes continuously with the changing of social relations. (Prison Notebooks, p. 355). It posited man in all manifold dimensions, the subject as well as the object of history; in reality as well as in rich diverse potentialities. The last-mentioned element is of far-reaching importance. Its exclusion would stifle living reality in a rigid armour, prevent the bursting forth of the unpredictable, and imprison the human future. It is, however, tfue, as the authors argue, that human society is interconnected through a network of rules and customs, and any arbitrary aberration in one field disrupts all others. War, by commanding soldiers to kill fellow-beings, removed normal inhibitions against raping, looting and drug-taking (pp. 18-19), and produced serious moral disorder in society. According to the authors, the major threats to humanity are war and environmental pollution (pp. 37-60, 186-204). War is the greatest evil of the contemporary civilisation and a danger to the dignity of life. The senseless killing leads to social demoralisation. War as well as the death penalty for civil crimes and murders ought to be abolished, as they undervalue the dignity of life. No human being has a moral right to deprive another human being of his life. Killing is irrevocable, whereas a living human being has the possibility of reforming. But under exceptional circumstances, when living becomes exceedingly humiliating, the individual should reserve the right to terminate life. Of course, suicide is permissible to uphold the dignity of life, not to lower it. The nuclear arms race has posed an unprecedented threat to the very survival of mankind. It can wipe out the entire human civilisation. Consequently, atomic disarmament is the first necessity for survival of the human race (pp. 186-89). Our planet is constantly threatened with the terror of total destruction at the push of a button (p. 199). Everyone should recognise the danger and compel the respective governments to destroy all nuclear arsenals. The nuclear race is senseless because in nuclear warfare there can be no such thing as a costly victory. It is absolutely irrational as it can result only in mass suicide (p. 204). It is a matter of grave concern not only to the participants in the dialogue but to the entire humanity. We are aware that a number of governments, institutions, groups and associations as