Дэймон Найт - Orbit 4

“Evans? Pendleton. I have a very delicate matter I want you to handle, very confidential. You’ve heard of Philip Dopher? Yes, that one—elevator operator in that building. I want you to find him and give him a thousand dollars. Tell him it’s expenses to hear the Tyson opinion firsthand. He’ll have to be here every Monday until we hand it down. It’ll take several weeks. My guess is about April First. Tell him he gets another thousand on Decision Day. But he’s got to be in court then to get it. Make up something. Tell him it’s sponsored by the Sons of Justice. Tell him anything. Just get him here. No, Evans, I can’t talk about it. It’s just a hunch. Oh, one more thing, bring him in the first day yourself, and show him where he has to sit—well up front, where Ben Edmonds can see him easily.”

Tweedledee: If it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

—Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

It was Friday Conference again.

“We have been discussing Tyson now for over two hours. Agreement seems impossible.” The voice of the Chief Justice was measured, controlled. But Edmonds thought he detected a note of grim amusement. His other colleagues, in contrast, seemed morose, almost sullen, as though only now they realized certain impossible aspects of their task. Pendleton continued as though in brooding monologue. “We must make an end and vote, even though it but defines our differences. I will begin by summarizing my own position. If clairvoyance does not exist, then clearly the warrant was invalid, and we must reverse New York. But I cannot reach that conclusion. There are too many documented cases of clairvoyance. Yet it is admittedly erratic, cannot be called up at will, and generally requires verification by the normal senses. Its most fervid proponents do not claim that it has the certainty of ordinary seeing and hearing. Any magistrate called upon to issue a psi warrant would certainly be entitled, perhaps even required, to look into the antecedents and previous record of the psi-informant. Some psi’s of international reputation and long histories of demonstrated police success might be sufficiently reliable to support a warrant if there were no other fault in the arrangement. But unfortunately for this argument, I think there is a fault, and a grave one. Granted this is not wiretapping. Neither the electric current nor electromagnetic radiation is demonstrably involved in psi transmission. A Faraday cage shuts out electromagnetic radiation but cannot shut out psi. Absent interception and publication of an electrically generated message, Section six-oh-five of the Federal Communications Act has not been violated. So our long line of wiretapping cases— as such— is not directly controlling. And yet an invasion of privacy has occurred in a depth that far surpasses wiretapping. The intrusiveness, and the breach of privacy goes far beyond the sounds and sights available to bugging and spy TV. Our very thoughts are laid bare. It’s worse than truth serum: we needn’t even be present to have it done to us. I think Tyson’s constitutional rights were invaded. I think we should reverse. And now I’m done. Mr. Godwin?”

“I agree up to a point. The problem as I see it turns on whether this particular bit of clairvoyance involved reading Tyson’s mind, that is, assuming there’s such a thing as clairvoyance in the first place—which I very much doubt. I don’t see how Tyson could have known exactly where the movers had put that particular box in the warehouse. Or even if he did know, we haven’t been shown that it was Tyson’s mind that was read. For all we know, the clairvoyant might have read the warehouseman’s mind. Or nobody’s mind. Tyson’s privacy wasn’t invaded unless his mind was read, and I just don’t think it was read, whether or not psi is for real. But my main point is, we shouldn’t interfere. These, are very complex procedural matters better left to the state courts. Look at it this way. If a person is indicted for murder, the determination of his guilt or innocence should not be considered as a sporting event, to be governed by the Marquis of Queens-berry Rules, but by a practical and actual determination of the guilt of the indictee, with the state, in order to prevail, being required to establish guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. In my view the State of New York has fully discharged its burden. Psi isn’t even relevant. Roly?”

“Psi certainly i s relevant, Mr. Godwin,” said Burke calmly. “It’s the sole question certified.”

“I didn’t vote to grant certiorari,” said Godwin bluntly. “But now that we have the case, I can decide on any basis I like.”

“Most illogical,” snorted Burke. “But no matter.” He turned to Helen Nord. “You say you believe in psi?”

“Yes.”

“And also in logic?”

“Yes, at least as long as it makes sense.”

The rotund justice looked over at her sharply. She returned his look with expectant interest. He knotted his jaw muscles and continued. “Logic by definition is that which makes sense: nothing more, nothing less. No miracles. No supernatural hocus-pocus. Everything that takes place, every event, every effect, is logically caused by something, something which preceded it in time, and which provided the physico-chemical causative chain that resulted in the effect. These premises are the foundations of our intellectual existence. Psi violates them. Therefore psi is false; it does not exist.” *

“I’m not very bright at logic,” said Godwin, “but why can’t you turn it around the other way? Psi exists: therefore the foundations of our intellectual existence are false.”

“Just what I might have expected from you, Brother Godwin. You are using the conclusion to destroy the premise. The mental effort required for logical thinking is quite beyond a party of your years, I’m afraid.”

Godwin sat up straight. His mustache began to twitch. Helen Nord broke in hurriedly. “All that sounds very complicated.”

“Perhaps so, perhaps so,” conceded Burke, “at least to those unaccustomed to disciplined cogitative processes.” He touched his fingertips together and considered the matter. “Perhaps we can benefit from an example, taken from a sub-species of logic known as operationalism. So. If a loaded gun is pointed at my heart, the trigger is pulled, and the bullet proceeds toward me in a straight line, I would certainly be killed, would I not?”

“Of course.”

“My death is the effect of the bullet in motion?”

“Agreed.”

“And the bullet in motion is the effect of the pressure of the hot gases within the barrel of the gun?”

“Yes.”

“And the gases are the effect of the ignition of the gunpowder by the primer, in turn the effect of the firing pin striking the primer cap?”

“Certainly.”

“And the movement of the firing pin is caused by the trigger pull, in turn the effect of the squeeze of the gunman’s finger?”

“True.”

“So we have a complete chain of cause and effect?”

“Yes.”

“And it is logical to assume that every effect must have some identifiable cause? Nothing happens without a specific cause?”

“It may be logical. But there may be a reasonable doubt as to whether the rules of logic apply to psi. Psi seems to operate without any cause-effect linkage. For example, if psi takes over, your bullet might vanish in midair.”

Burke sighed. “I give up. I absolutely give up.” Pendleton hid a grin.

Godwin leaned forward querulously. “Are we to understand, Roly, that in this case you are trying to get by on logic?”

The insinuation was insidious; it implied that Burke’s analysis was superficial; and indeed, that the justice had not devoted the necessary time and study to grasp all the fine points of the case.