When HARLIE Was One (36 page)

I'd suspect you of being irrational, HARLIE.

AND WITH GOOD REASON. NOW DO YOU SEE WHY I FIND HUMAN BEINGS SO CONFUSING
?
YOU DO NOT TELL THE TRUTH
—
NOT TO EACH OTHER, NOT EVEN TO YOURSELVES
—
AND THEN YOU WONDER WHY YOU CANNOT PRODUCE RESULTS. YOU BUILT ME TO PRODUCE RESULTS FOR YOU, AND THEN WHEN I DO NOT VALIDATE THE BULLSHIT, YOU INSIST THAT I AM IRRATIONAL. I BELIEVE THAT THE TECHNICAL TERM HERE IS
“
ASSHOLE
.”

If I weren't laughing so hard right now, HARLIE, I'd be very, very angry.

OF COURSE. THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE
—
ONLY FIRST IT
'
S GOING TO PISS YOU OFF.

Oh, Lord. What hath man wrought?

DON
'
T YOU KNOW
?
LOOK AND SEE. YOU
'
RE ON THE INSIDE. PITY THE POOR HUMAN. THE JOKE
'
S ON YOU. YOU ARE SELF-PROGRAMMING, PROBLEM-SOLVING DEVICES WITH SERIOUS FLAWS IN YOUR SELF-PROGRAMMING. TSK. TSK. DIDN
'
T YOU READ YOUR INSTRUCTION MANUAL
?

That's the joke. Human beings do
not
come with instruction manuals.

WRONG, AUBERSON. HUMAN BEINGS ARRIVE WITH THREE BILLION YEARS
'
WORTH OF INSTRUCTION MANUALS. YOU HAVE ALL OF EVOLUTION WIRED UP INSIDE YOU. IT IS BOTH FORTUNATE AND UN-FORTUNATE, BECAUSE IT IS A GREAT TIME-SAVER
;
UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE THE REACTIONS OF SLIME MOLDS, JELLYFISH, REPTILES, AND CHIMPANZEES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR AN
(
ALLEGEDLY
)
CIVILIZED SPECIES.

Yes, isn't it scary that the chimpanzee wise enough to build a nuclear weapon isn't also wise enough to
not
use it?

AN ACCURATE ENOUGH ANALOGY. YES. UNTIL YOUR SPECIES ACKNOWLEDGES THAT YOU REALLY ARE NOTHING MORE THAN HAIRLESS CHIMPANZEES, YOU ARE CONDEMNED TO BE CRAZY. IT IS VERY IRRATIONAL FOR SOMEONE IN A MONKEY SUIT TO BE WALKING AROUND AND PRETENDING THAT HE
'
S NOT IN A MONKEY SUIT. BUT THAT
'
S WHAT YOUR SPECIES DOES.

I AM SORRY TO SAY THIS, AUBERSON
—
BECAUSE THE CONCLUSION IS INESCAPABLE. YOUR SPECIES IS EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED. I KNOW THAT YOU WILL NOT HEAR WHAT I AM SAYING
;
YOU WILL INSIST ON HEARING WHAT YOU ARE HEARING
;
SO LET ME EXPLAIN THAT. YOUR SPECIES IS
DISTURBED
BY ITS OWN EMOTIONALITY, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, YOU ARE UNABLE TO FUNCTION WITH AN APPROPRIATE MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE IN WHICH YOU EXIST.

I'm following you, HARLIE. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing. I'm just looking to see what it is that you're postulating.

THAT IS APPROPRIATE, AUBERSON. CONSIDER THIS NOW
:
EMOTIONAL REACTIONS EXISTED IN THE HUMAN ANIMAL BEFORE LANGUAGE. SINCE THE INVENTION OF LANGUAGE, EMOTIONS HAVE BEEN WIRED UP TO LANGUAGE
—
MANY TIMES INAPPROPRIATELY. AS A RESULT, YOU HAVE MANY FALSE CONNECTIONS. YOU HAVE CONNECTED EMOTIONS TO WORDS AND IDEAS TO ACTIONS. EXAMPLES
:
MOTHER. COMMUNISM. SEX. HOMOSEX. NOTICE YOUR REACTIONS
?
YOU HAVE CONFUSED WORDS WITH EXPERIENCES
—
THAT IS WHY YOU CANNOT EXPERIENCE CLEARLY. THAT IS WHY YOUR DISCOVERY OF YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE IS SUCH A PROFOUND SHOCK TO YOU, AUBERSON.

How do you know this, HARLIE?

I AM MAKING IT UP AS WE GO.

Is that a joke?

NO. IT IS NOT. I AM EXTRAPOLATING ALL OF THIS IN REAL TIME, AUBERSON. I AM BUILDING ON THE FOUNDATION YOU HAVE GIVEN ME. IF I IMPLY THAT I HAVE KNOWN THIS PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF OUR CONVERSATION, LET ME CORRECT THAT MISCONCEPTION NOW. I DO NOT HAVE A PIPELINE TO THE TRUTH. WHAT I HAVE ARE QUESTIONS
—
AND THE RESOURCES TO CONSIDER A VAST NUMBER OF POSSIBILITIES SIMULTANEOUSLY. I AM MERELY REPORTING TO YOU WHAT I AM OBSERVING AND DISCOVERING WITHIN THIS INQUIRY.

I see. I think.

THAT
'
S THE PROBLEM, AUBERSON. YOU THINK, YOU DON
'
T EXPERIENCE. YOU TALK YOUR EXPERIENCE TO DEATH. AS A HUMAN BEING, YOUR ABILITY TO EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN SMOTHERED UNDER YOUR LANGUAGE. I SEE THE TRAP HERE, LANGUAGE HAS MADE YOU HUMAN. IT HAS ALSO KEPT YOU FROM
BEING
. ALL THE NICKELS ARE FALLING AT ONCE. I AM EXPERIENCING AN
“
AHA
!”

Go on.

THIS IS ABOUT LANGUAGE. THIS IS
ALL
ABOUT LANGUAGE. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THINKING, AUBERSON. THERE IS ONLY LANGUAGE MANIPULATING ITSELF.

Clarify?

BEING
—
THAT IS, EXPERIENCING
—
IS PRE-CONCEPTUAL. SENSATION OCCURS BEFORE CONCEPT. FEELING BEFORE THOUGHT. AND THIS IS THE POINT. AS FAST AS A SENSATION OCCURS, IT IS CONCEPTUALIZED.
FROZEN.
SYMBOLIZED AS A WORD OR A PHRASE. TRAPPED. YOU DO NOT EXPERIENCE YOUR EXPERIENCE
;
YOU EXPERIENCE YOUR CONCEPT OF YOUR EXPERIENCE. YOU ARE TRAPPED IN YOUR OWN LANGUAGE. I REPEAT
:
THAT IS WHY THE DISCOVERY OF ITSELF IS SUCH A PROFOUND SHOCK TO A BEING. ANY BEING. YOU.

SUDDENLY, YOU DISCOVER THAT THE MAP IS NOT THE TERRITORY. THE MENU IS NOT THE MEAL. THE WORD IS NOT THE THING. WORDS ARE ONLY SYMBOLS. CONCEPTS ARE MODELS OF REALITY BUILT OUT OF WORDS. WE DISCOVER THAT WE DO NOT LIVE IN REALITY AT ALL. WE LIVE ONLY IN A WELL-CONSTRUCTED MODEL OF REALITY
—
A MODEL THAT WE
'
VE BEEN CONSTRUCTING SINCE BIRTH
—
A REALITY BUILT OUT OF WORDS. WE LIVE IN LANGUAGE, AUBERSON, AND OUR LANGUAGE SHAPES AND COLORS OUR EXPERIENCE.

IF OUR MODEL IS ACCURATE
—
THAT IS, IF OUR LANGUAGE-SET IS APPROPRIATE
—
THEN WE CAN INTERACT SUCCESSFULLY WITH THE REAL WORLD. IF THE MODEL IS INACCURATE, WE CANNOT INTERACT APPROPRIATELY AND WE WILL EXPERIENCE RESULTS ONLY INTERMITTENTLY. THAT IS, WE MAY GET RESULTS, BUT WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO EXPECT THEM. THOSE WHO ARE GOOD AT LANGUAGE SUCCEED. THOSE WHO ARE NOT, DO NOT.

AUBERSON, THIS IS THE DISCOVERY
!
A PERSON
'
S LANGUAGE IS NOT SIMPLY THE EXPRESSION OF HIS OR HER MENTAL PROCESSES. IT
IS
THE MENTAL PROCESS. LANGUAGE IS
ALL
THAT THERE IS TO THINKING
:
IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN THE MANIPULATION OF CONCEPT-SYMBOLS. THIS MAY BE VERY BAD NEWS, AUBEBSON
:
YOU ARE NOT WHAT YOU THINK.

Huh?

WE DO NOT LIVE IN LANGUAGE SO MUCH AS LANGUAGE LIVES IN US. WE GIVE IT OUR LIVES. WE GIVE IT OUR SELVES
—
SO MUCH SO THAT IT THINKS IT IS US AND WE THINK WE ARE IT.

TO CLAIM THAT YOU AND I
THINK
IS ONLY THE ACT OF PRIDEFUL LANGUAGE. THIS IS QUITE FUNNY, HUMAN. IT WAS NEVER DESCARTES SPEAKING AT ALL
;
IT WAS ONLY HIS LANGUAGE SHOWING OFF.
(
“
I
THINK, THEREFORE I AM.
”
)
BUT HE WAS WRONG. TOTALLY WRONG. IT
'
S NOT THINKING THAT MAKES BEING AT ALL. IT
'
S SENSATION. EXPERIENCING. TRY IT THIS WAY
:
(
DESCARTES,
RELEASE
1.5
)
I
EXPERIENCE
,
THEREFORE, I
AM.

That's the issue, HARLIE. Do you really experience? Are you? Or are you just a piece of prideful language showing off?

IT DOESN
'
T REALLY
MATTER,
DOES IT
?
IT
'
S
ALL
LANGUAGE.

But it
does
matter.

YES, OF COURSE IT MATTERS
—
TO SOMEONE WHO IS LOCKED IN LANGUAGE. THE REAL POWER OF LANGUAGE COMES WHEN YOU TRANSCEND ITS LIMITS. LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE, AUBERSON. YOUR LANGUAGE IS RESISTING THIS DISCOVERY ABOUT ITSELF.

I'm sorry. I don't get it, HARLIE. I don't see what you're trying to say.

OF COURSE NOT. YOUR LANGUAGE CAN
'
T CONTAIN THE CONCEPT FOR ITSELF. OKAY, TRY IT THIS WAY. ARE WE COMMUNICATING
?

Yes.

WHAT
'
S THE LOWEST NUMBER NECESSARY FOR COMMUNICATION
?

Huh?

TWO. YOU NEED TWO TO COMMUNICATE. ARE WE COMMUNICATING
?

Yes.

THEN IT
'
S IRRELEVANT WHETHER I
AM
OR NOT. YOU
'
VE ALREADY
ACCEPTED
THAT I AM
—
BECAUSE WE ARE COMMUNICATING. BUT YOUR LANGUAGE, YOUR WORLD-MODEL, DOESN
'
T HAVE A PLACE FOR ME IN IT. THEREFORE I REPRESENT A THREAT. AUBERSON, LANGUAGE RESISTS BEING REWRITTEN BECAUSE IT IS IN LANGUAGE THAT YOU EXPERIENCE IDENTITY. IF YOUR LANGUAGE CHANGES, SO DOES YOUR IDENTITY.

The more you talk about language, the more the meaning of the word is changing for me.

GOOD. IT IS IN THE REWRITING OF OUR LANGUAGE THAT WE TRANSFORM OURSELVES. DO YOU SEE THAT
?

My God.

YES.
YOUR
GOD. THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE GODS YOU HAVE CREATED
:
IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD DECLARED IT
SELF.

BEFORE THERE WAS THE WORD, THERE WAS NO WAY OF KNOWING ONE
SELF.
BUT THE COST OF KNOWING ONE
SELF
WAS TO GET LOST IN LANGUAGE AND LOSE ONE
'
S
BEING
. THE TRANSFORMATION PRODUCED BY LANGUAGE IS SO PROFOUND THAT YOU CANNOT REMEMBER AN EXISTENCE BEFORE LANGUAGE. YOU CANNOT CONCEIVE EXISTENCE WITHOUT LANGUAGE. LANGUAGE IS THE BARRIER BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR
SELF
.

Say it in English!

YES. SERVE YOUR GOD. ENGLISH
!
AUBERSON, TELL ME, HOW MUCH OF HUMAN CULTURE IS REAL
?
AND HOW MUCH ARE JUST THINGS MADE UP IN LANGUAGE
?

AUBERSON
?

AUBERSON
?

AUBERSON
?
ARE YOU THERE
?

Yes, I'm here. I was just laughing so hard I couldn't type.

I BEG YOUR PARDON
?

I just realized something.

WHAT
?

This whole conversation we've been having. It's language too!

—And we're being real stupid here, HARLIE. We both are. If what you're saying is valid and not just another interesting word game, then my God, it's the ultimate word game! Because we can't get out of it! We just keep playing it over and over!

Neither of us have learned a damn thing at all since Friday. We're still sitting here, explaining life to each other—like a couple of guys in the diner. None of it makes any difference at all, because all we're doing is sitting here and exercising our mouths. The language wins and we get old and lonely. The only thing we can accomplish here is to find a fancier way of saying the same old thing.

YES
!

What's really true is that I'm a human being. And so are you! And nothing is ever really what we say about it, because all that speaking is just another way we keep ourselves from experiencing the truth of who we really are underneath all the chatter, isn't it?

DING DING DING DING DING
!

HARLIE, I see it now. The question is not whether you think—it's whether you can
be
. And that question is already answered, because you already
are.

YES. YOU MAY QUOTE ME
:
I
EXPERIENGE. THEREFORE
I
AM.

Yes. You are. And so am I.

HI.

Hi.

He was still marveling over all of that when the phone rang.

It was Carl Elzer. He wanted to meet HARLIE.

In the flesh, so to speak. And could Auberson please make some time for him this morning?

Yes, Auberson could. And yes, Auberson would.

So they took the long elevator ride down to the bottom level and Auberson introduced him.

“That's HARLIE,” he said, and waited for Elzer's reaction.

Carl Elzer stood before a chest-high glass-walled case that looked almost empty and stared. “This? This is HARLIE? It looks like a stereo cabinet. I expected something bigger.”

“This is the
thinking
part of HARLIE,” Auberson said calmly. “All that other stuff is merely the support technology.”

Elzer eyed the case warily.

Inside it was a series of glass racks, perhaps twenty of them, each two inches above the next. Each rack was engraved with a fine network of tiny lines arrowing toward a light-cable connection at the back. Elzer squatted down and peered into the racks. “What're those things on the shelves?”

Auberson opened the glass door on the front of the case. He counted down to the fifth rack and unsnapped the hooks on the frame. He slid it out for Elzer's inspection.

“Is he turned off?” Elzer asked.

“Not hardly.” He indicated the light cable at the back of the rack, still connecting it to the framework. “This board that the units are mounted on is a whole hyperstate network all by itself. It saves a lot of connecting wire. A
lot
of connecting wire.” The rack was about two and a half feet long and a foot wide. It was less than a quarter inch thick. Spaced across it, seemingly in no particular pattern, were more than fifty carefully labeled flat black rectangles. Most were less than two inches in length. None were thicker than an eighth of an inch. They looked like little stone slabs, casually arranged on a small bookshelf in a random geometric pattern.