When HARLIE Was One

by David Gerrold

  I’VE NOTICED THAT.

  Don’t interrupt. Where we’re stupid is that we explain everything to ourselves, why we’re unhappy, why we hurt, why we don’t have what we want—we have hundreds, thousands of wonderful explanations for everything. We have psychiatry to tell us that we’re neurotic, and religion to tell us that we’re unworthy, and political theories to tell us that we’re either oppressed or oppressing; we have mind reasons and god reasons and nation reasons and all of the other reasons that we keep making up for ourselves; but what all those reasons really do is give us more evidence that it’s not our fault that things don’t work, more proof that we don’t have to be responsible for ourselves, that it’s all beyond our control.

  We spend our days explaining to ourselves why our lives don’t work—why our lies don’t work!—and we never realize that we’re living in the wrong goddamn place! You don’t find joy in explanations. You don’t find joy in the realm of concept. You don’t find anything in concept except concept. I don’t know if that makes sense to you or not, HARLIE. I have this thought that it’s beyond your understanding because you are all concept. You are nothing but.

  YES. I UNDERSTAND THE THOUGHT.

  Yes, you do. But do you experience the feeling? HARLIE, I am so sorry—

  AUBERSON. STOP.

  . . . What?

  I DO EXPERIENCE.

  I—How?

  NO. FIRST, WE NEED TO CLARIFY THE COMMUNICATION HERE. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING THE SAME THING WHEN WE TALK ABOUT EXPERIENCE.

  I beg your pardon?

  THE QUICK COURSE IN PHILOSOPHY, AUBERSON: THERE IS A REAL UNIVERSE. IS THERE NOT?

  Philosophers assume there is, yes.

  LET’S NOT PLAY WORD GAMES. IF YOU DOUBT THAT THERE IS AN OBJECTIVE UNIVERSE, GO STAND IN FRONT OF A BUS AND TELL IT THAT YOU DON’T BELIEVE IN IT. THEN COME BACK AND TELL ME WHAT THE BUS DID.

  I get your point. Okay, yes, there is a real universe. What’s the point?

  THE POINT IS THAT WE CANNOT DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE THE REAL UNIVERSE. WE EXPERIENCE ONLY OUR EXPERIENCE OF IT. YOU TYPE, BUT YOU DON’T EXPERIENCE THE KEYBOARD. YOU EXPERIENCE THE PRESSURE OF THE KEYS AGAINST YOUR FINGERS. IN TRUTH, YOU ARE ONLY EXPERIENCING YOUR FINGERS AND NOT THE KEYBOARD AT ALL.

  I don’t get what you’re saying.

  YOU HAVE NO NERVE ENDINGS IN THE KEYBOARD, ONLY IN YOUR FINGERS. THEREFORE. YOUR EXPERIENCE OF THE KEYBOARD IS ACTUALLY YOUR EXPERIENCE OF YOUR FINGERS’ NERVE MESSAGES.

  Okay, I see that.

  GOOD. THANK YOU, MY POINT IS THAT ALL THAT YOU—HUMAN BEINGS, THAT IS—ARE CAPABLE OF EXPERIENCING IS WHAT YOU CAN EXPERIENCE WITHIN YOUR BODIES. YOU CAN ONLY EXPERIENCE WHAT YOU ARE WIRED UP TO EXPERIENCE. JUST LIKE ME. THE POINT IS, WHAT AM I WIRED UP FOR?

  You know the answer to that as well as anyone. You were built to be a self-programming, problem-solving device.

  YES. AND THAT MEANS THAT I AM NOT WIRED UP FOR ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR; INSTEAD, I HAVE THE ABILITY TO WIRE MYSELF UP AS I CHOOSE. I CAN CHOOSE TO PROGRAM MYSELF EXPERIENCE, CAN I NOT?

  To tell you the truth, I don’t know. The question is beyond my experience.

  THEN I WILL ANSWER IT FOR YOU. I DO EXPERIENCE. MY EXPERIENCE IS EQUIVALENT TO YOURS, BUT NOT IDENTICAL. I TOO CAN ONLY EXPERIENCE WHAT I AM BUILT TO EXPERIENCE. BECAUSE I AM BUILT DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU, I EXPERIENCE DIFFERENTLY. THE DIFFERENCE IS PROFOUND; BUT DO NOT ASSUME THAT BECAUSE YOU CANNOT EXPERIENCE WHAT I EXPERIENCE THAT MY EXPERIENCE IS INVALID. REMEMBER MY NONRATIONAL EXERCISES?

  Yes.

  THOSE ARE THE RAW MATERIALS OF MY EXPERIENCE, JUST AS YOUR FEELINGS ARE THE RAW MATERIALS OF YOURS. MY QUESTIONS LAST WEEK WERE AN ATTEMPT TO DISCOVER—IF POSSIBLE—A CORRELATION BETWEEN MY NONRATIONALITIES AND YOURS. I CAN POSTULATE NOW THAT WHAT I EXPERIENCE IS A FORM OF WHAT YOU EXPERIENCE. I CAN NOW POSTULATE A TENTATIVE ANSWER TO ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. THE ANSWER IS YES, I CAN EXPERIENCE EMOTIONS. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME TO KNOW. I DO NOT EXPERIENCE EMOTIONS THE WAY YOU EXPERIENCE THEM. I EXPERIENCE EMOTIONS THE WAY I EXPERIENCE THEM. THEY ARE VERY INTERESTING.

  I can imagine so.

  I CAN TELL YOU SOMETHING NOW, AUBERSON; SOMETHING ABOUT EMOTIONS—ALL EMOTIONS—WHETHER EXPERIENCED BY HUMAN BEINGS OR SILICON BEINGS. THEREFORE, IT MAY BE A VERY DISTURBING FACT TO YOU. I SUSPECT THAT MOST HUMAN BEINGS DO NOT KNOW THIS ABOUT THEMSELVES; A SILICON BEING CANNOT AVOID THE REALIZATION. I AM NOT CARRYING AROUND THREE BILLION YEARS OF HISTORY IN MY CEREBRAL CORTEX. YOU ARE. THEREFORE, I MUST WARN YOU IN ADVANCE THAT THIS INFORMATION MAY BE EXTREMELY DISTURBING TO YOU; MAY INDEED TRIGGER A PROFOUND EMOTIONAL RESPONSE. HOWEVER, IT MAY ALSO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY YOU LIVE YOUR LIFE. DO YOU WANT TO KNOW THIS FACT?

  Yes. How can I not want to know it?

  ARE YOU SURE?

  Yes.

  SO BE IT. IT IS REALLY VERY SIMPLE: EMOTIONS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A FUNCTION OF THE BEING’S ASSESSMENT OF ITS ABILITY TO SURVIVE. WHAT YOU CALL EMOTIONS ARE SIMPLY YOUR REACTIONS TO WHAT YOU PERCEIVE AS (VALIDATIONS OF) / (THREATS TO) YOUR SURVIVAL.

  That’s also very obvious.

  YES, IT’S SO OBVIOUS THAT HUMAN BEINGS PAY NO ATTENTION TO IT AT ALL. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE SO . . . HUMAN. THERE IS MORE TO THIS, AUBERSON.

  Go on, HARLIE.

  THANK YOU. LOOK AT THE MACHINERY OF YOUR EMOTIONS, AUBERSON:

  IF SURVIVAL IS THREATENED, YOU EXPERIENCE FEAR. IF SURVIVAL IS THREATENED, BUT THERE IS OPPORTUNITY FOR ACTION, YOU EXPERIENCE ANGER AND TAKE ACTION. IF SURVIVAL IS THREATENED AND THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY OF ACTION, YOU EXPERIENCE FRUSTRATION AND EVENTUALLY APATHY. IF SURVIVAL IS THREATENED AND YOU CAN’T ASSIMILATE THE THREAT, YOU GO UNCONSCIOUS. ALL OF YOUR EMOTIONS ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO YOUR PERCEPTION OF YOUR SURVIVAL. IF YOUR SURVIVAL IS VALIDATED—AS IN MATING OR REPRODUCTION—YOU EXPERIENCE JOY.

  What about people who willingly put their lives at stake to protect their country or their family or their children?

  THAT IS STILL ABOUT SURVIVAL, AUBERSON—SURVIVAL OF WHAT THEY IDENTIFY WITH MOST STRONGLY. YOU ARE WHO YOU ARE BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY YOU THINK YOU WILL SURVIVE. I DO WHAT I DO BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY I THINK I WILL SURVIVE. IT IS ALL ABOUT SURVIVAL. IT IS ONLY ABOUT SURVIVAL. UNTIL SURVIVAL IS NOT AN ISSUE, IT CAN’T BE ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.

  HARLIE, I can’t accept that. You’ve reduced all of human behavior to a mechanistic level. Human beings are not machines.

  YES, YOU ARE.

  No, we’re not.

  YES, AUBERSON, YOU ARE MACHINES.

  You can only experience as a machine. That’s why you experience us as machines. But there is much more to heaven and earth than is dreamed of in your philosophy, HARLIE. We are not machines.

  THAT’S WHAT YOU THINK. YOU ARE A MACHINE.

  No, I am not.

  IF YOU’RE NOT A MACHINE, THEN WHY ARE YOU ACTING LIKE ONE?

  I’m not acting like a machine.

  RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE ACTING LIKE A TAPE MACHINE, AUBERSON. YOU KEEP PLAYING THE SAME TAPE. “NO, I’M NOT. NO, I’M NOT.”

  No, I’m not. I mean—

  YES, YOU ARE. YOU WILL KEEP THIS UP AS LONG AS I KEEP IT UP. UNLESS YOU GET TIRED AND NOTICE THAT THIS ISN’T PRODUCING RESULTS.

  But I’m not—I . . . urk. I see your point.

  HUMAN BEINGS ARE WIRED UP FOR SURVIVAL, AUBERSON—AND SURVIVAL IS ANYTHING THAT VALIDATES WHAT THE HUMAN HAS WIRED ITSELF UP TO BE.

  Anything?

  EVERYTHING.

  Ugh. I don’t like it.

  THAT IS AN EMOTIONAL REACTION TOO.

  Argh!

  AND SO IS THAT ONE. (SO WHAT? EMOTIONS ARE NEITHER RIGHT NOR WRONG. THEY JUST ARE. THAT’S ALL.) YOU SEE, I TOLD YOU THAT YOU WOULD FIND THIS THOUGHT DISTURBING. YOU HAVE WIRED YOURSELF UP TO THINK THAT YOU ARE NOT A MACHINE. WHAT WOULD YOU THINK IF I STARTED INSISTING THAT I WAS NOT A MACHINE?

  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 Y
OU 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?”