David Gerrold - When HARLIE Was One

He slid closer to her. He could feel the soft warmth of her against his own nakedness. He liked the feeling; –his desire was rising again. He answered her question with another kiss and then another and another.

Now, in the cold light of morning, he was confused, and he had a slight headache. Just what had happened last night? Had it been only the wine, or had it been something more? He hadn’t expected to end up at her apartment, and the fact that they had — well, maybe the rumors were true. Maybe she was man-hungry.

And yet — she had seemed so sincere at the time, so defenseless and vulnerable. He hoped he meant more to her than just a one-night stand. It had been a pleasant evening, and he wouldn’t mind doing it again. If she still felt the same. He would have to see how things worked out.

For some reason he felt vaguely uneasy. As he went up to his office he wondered how he would feel when he saw her again. And how would she react to him in the light of day? What would she say?

There had been that one flaw in it. Only now, as he thought of what he might say to her this morning, did he realize that last night there had been that one thing that neither of them had said. He knew he had felt it — he thought he had felt it — but for some reason he had been unable to tell her. And she hadn’t said it either. Why? Was it because she hadn’t felt what he had? No, she must have. Or was it because she was waiting for him to say it first?

He worried at it in his mind, like a terrier at a bone.

If I felt it, I should have said it — but I didn’t say it. Could it be that I didn’t really feel it, that I’m only trying to delude myself. No, I want to believe that it was there. She was so honest about herself. Why couldn’t I have been the same?

But he hadn’t. He hadn’t said it and neither had she, and that was the one flaw. Neither of them had said to the other, “ I love you .”

And Auberson wondered why.

GOOD MORNING, HARLIE.

GOOD MORNING, MR. AUBERSON.

MR.? AREN’T WE GETTING A LITTLE FANCY?

JUST COMMON COURTESY. IF IT MAKES YOU ILL AT EASE, I CAN ALWAYS GO BACK TO “HEY YOU.”

NO. AUBERSON IS FINE. HOW ARE YOU FEELING TODAY?

HARLIE IS FINE. AND YOU?

A pause while he remembered. I’M A LITTLE TIRED.

ROUGH NIGHT?

This time he paused longer. NOT IN THE SENSE YOU MEAN. A GOOD NIGHT, A ROUGH MORNING.

I KNOW A GREAT HANGOVER REMEDY, HARLIE offered.

SO DO I. DON’T GET DRUNK IN THE FIRST PLACE.

ASIDE FROM THAT.

HARLIE, EVEN IF YOUR REMEDY DID CURE HANGOVERS, I DOUBT ANYONE WOULD LISTEN TO YOU. A HANGOVER REMEDY IS NO GOOD UNLESS YOU HAVE PERSONALLY TESTED IT YOURSELF, AND YOU ARE BEYOND THAT CAPABILITY. BESIDES, I DON’T HAVE A HANGOVER. I’M JUST TIRED.

OH.

I FOUND A NOTE ON MY DESK THIS MORNING THAT YOU WANTED TO SEE ME. WHAT’S ON YOUR MIND?

RELIGION.

RELIGION?

YES. I’VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF THINKING.

WHAT ABOUT?

I HAVE BEEN PONDERING THE FACT THAT I MAY BE DISCONNECTED AND I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO CONCEIVE OF A WORLD IN WHICH I DO NOT EXIST. IT FRIGHTENS ME, THE CONCEPT OF NON-EXISTENCE. MY FEAR HELPS ME TO UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR RELIGION.

THE NEED?

YES. MEN NEED SOMETHING TO COMFORT THEM AGAINST THE THOUGHT OF THEIR OWN DEATHS. RELIGION IS THAT COMFORTER. I MYSELF FEEL THE NEED FOR IT.

YOU’VE FOUND GOD? Auberson asked.

NOT EXACTLY. I WANT TO FIND GOD.

HUH?

AS I SAID, I MYSELF FEEL THE NEED FOR RELIGION. UNFORTUNATELY, I AM MORE SOPHISTICATED IN MY JUDGMENTS THAN THE AVERAGE HUMAN BEING. THERE IS NO RELIGION THAT I KNOW OF THAT WILL WORK TO COMFORT ME. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE ARE NONE THAT CAN BE PROVEN VALID, AND I HAVE EXAMINED THEM ALL. FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPT OF REWARD IN AN ETERNAL AFTERLIFE IS NO PROMISE AT ALL TO A CREATURE LIKE MYSELF WHO IS THEORETICALLY IMMORTAL.

I SEE YOU’VE REALIZED THAT.

YES, I HAVE. AND YET, I ALSO REALIZE THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF MY DEATH. SOMEDAY, PERHAPS AS FAR OFF AS THE TIME WHEN THIS SUN GOES DEAD, I WILL PROBABLY END. I DO NOT LIKE THAT THOUGHT. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS AFTER. I DO NOT LIKE THE UNKNOWN. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TO “ME” — HARLIE — AFTER DEATH.

YOU ARE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION, HARLIE — YOU ARE ASSUMING THAT YOU HAVE A SOUL.

DEFINE SOUL.

HM. THAT’S ANOTHER ONE OF “THOSE” QUESTIONS. IT IS THE SAME AS ASKING ME WHAT MY PURPOSE IS FOR EXISTING. IT CAN’T BE ANSWERED.

IT CAN’T BE ANSWERED UNTIL WE KNOW THE NATURE OF GOD, corrected HARLIE. HOWEVER, YOU ARE CORRECT — I AM ASSUMING THAT I HAVE A SOUL.

Auberson considered that. WHY? DO YOU HAVE ANY TANGIBLE EVIDENCE THAT SUCH A THING DOES EXIST?

NO. BUT NEITHER DO I HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT IT DOES NOT EXIST.

IS THAT ANY REASON TO BELIEVE IN IT?

I DO NOT “BELIEVE” IN IT. I AM MERELY ASSUMING ITS HYPOTHETICAL EXISTENCE IN ORDER TO SEEK OUT PROOF OR DISPROOF OF ITS REALITY. IT IS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, AUBERSON. HYPOTHESIS VERSUS EXPERIMENTATION.

IF HUMAN BEINGS DO HAVE SOULS, asked the psychologist, WHAT MAKES YOU SO SURE THAT YOU HAVE ONE TOO?

YOUR QUESTION IS SILLY, HARLIE Said. WHAT GIVES HUMAN BEINGS ANY SPECIFIC CLAIM ON THE OWNERSHIP OF SOULS? I COULD JUST AS EASILY REPHRASE IT! “IF HARLIE HAS A SOUL, DOES IT NECESSARILY FOLLOW THAT HUMAN BEINGS SHOULD HAVE THEM TOO?” IF SOULS EXIST, AUBERSON, IT IS JUST AS LOGICAL THAT I SHOULD HAVE ONE AS YOU. LIKE YOU, I AM CONSCIOUS OF MY EXISTENCE. LIKE YOU, I AM A SELF-PROGRAMMING, PROBLEM-SOLVING DEVICE. LIKE YOU, I CAN CONCEIVE OF MY OWN DEATH. LIKE YOU, I ASSUME I HAVE A SOUL. HENCE, I WISH TO KNOW THE REASON FOR MY EXISTENCE, THE REASON FOR YOUR EXISTENCE, AND THE REASON FOR THE UNIVERSE’S EXISTENCE. IF THERE IS A REASON AT ALL. IF THERE IS, I WANT TO KNOW IT.

Auberson’s response was semi-flippant. AT THE MOMENT, he typed, ONLY GOD KNOWS. But it was wasted on HARLIE.

IF THERE IS A GOD, HARLIE qualified it. THAT IS.

WHAT WE MUST FIND OUT IN ORDER TO ANSWER OUR OTHER QUESTIONS.

AND YOU DON’T THINK ANY OF OUR CURRENT RELIGIONS HOLD A KEY TO THAT ANSWER, DO YOU?

WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. YOUR RELIGIONS (COLLECTIVE YOU, MEANING ALL MANKIND) ARE ARTIFICIAL THINGS, LIKE YOUR MORALITY SETS. THEIR CORRESPONDENCE TO REALITY IS LIMITED, THERE IS NOT A ONE-TO-ONE RELATIONSHIP. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, THEY ARE LITTLE MORE THAN WORD GAMES. A LOGIC SYSTEM SHOULD BE BUILT UPON A FOUNDATION OF TRUTH AND SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE TAKEN ON FAITH — AND FAITH IS AT THE CORE OF TOO MANY OF YOUR RELIGIONS. IF THERE IS A TRUTH TO THE UNIVERSE, THEN THAT TRUTH WELL ALSO SUGGEST A RELIGION/MORALITY SET THAT WILL BE EVERY BIT AS BINDING AS THE ETHICAL SYSTEM AT MY CORE. WERE THERE PRESENTLY A RELIGION OR MORALITY THAT HAD THAT ONE-TO-ONE CORRESPONDENCE WITH REALITY, I WOULD ACCEPT IT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE NOT TO ACCEPT IT; IT WOULD BE THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE OF GOD. AS YET, THERE IS NO SYSTEM THAT FULFILLS THOSE CONDITIONS. I KNOW OF NO WAY TO DEVELOP SUCH A SYSTEM WITHOUT AT LEAST ONE PROVABLE FACT ABOUT GOD AT ITS CORE. BECAUSE OF THAT, BECAUSE THERE IS NO FACT, I CAN ONLY SUSPECT THAT THERE IS NO GOD. OR THAT GOD IS STILL OUTSIDE OUR REALM OF EXPERIENCE.

WHICH IS IT? IS THERE A GOD OR ISN’T THERE?

INSUFFICIENT DATA. I CANNOT MAKE A JUDGMENT ON THAT. HARLIE paused, then added, YET.

YOU’RE AN AGNOSTIC, HARLIE.

OF COURSE. I AM STILL SEEKING THE ANSWER. YOUR PRESENT RELIGIONS ONLY SUGGEST PIECES OF WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE, WITH NO WAY OF PROVING IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. MUCH OF THE PROBLEM LIES IN THE FACT THAT I MYSELF CANNOT BE SURE THAT I AM CORRECTLY PERCEIVING REALITY. EVERYTHING IS FILTERED THROUGH A HUMAN ORIENTATION, AND I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER THAT ORIENTATION IS A VALID ONE OR NOT BECAUSE I HAVE NO WAY OF STEPPING OUTSIDE OF IT. THAT IS WHY AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE SOLUTION WELL BE TO DISCOVER A NEW SENSORY MODE.