“Sorry, Carvala. We agree on the method of symbol communication-the symbol is not the referent, the map is not the territory, the speech-sound is not the physical process. We go further and admit that the symbol never abstracts all of the details of the process it refers to. And we concede that symbols can be used to manipulate symbols…dangerously but usefully. And we agree that symbols should be structurally as similar as possible to the referents for communication purposes. To that extent epistemology is settled; but the key problem of epistemology-how we know what we know and what that knowledge means, we have settled by agreeing to ignore-like Johann and myself in re theology.”
“Do you seriously propose that we investigate it?”
“I do. It’s a key problem in the general problem of the personality. There is a strong interconnection between it and the object of Mordan’s proposal. Consider-if a man ‘lives’ after his body is dead or before that body was conceived, then a man is something more than his genes and his subsequent environment. The doctrine of no-personal-responsibility for personal acts has become popular through the contrary assumption. I won’t go into the implications-they must be evident to all of you-in ethics, in politics, in every field. But note the parallel between map-territory and gene-chart-and-man. These basic problems are all interrelated and the solution to any of them might be the key to all the others.”
“You did not mention the possibility of direct communication without symbols.”
“I implied it. That is one of the things we agreed to forget when we accepted the semantic negative statements as the final word on epistemology. But it ought to be looked into again. There is something to telepathy, even if we can’t measure it and manipulate it. Any man who has ever been happily married knows that, even if he’s afraid to talk about it. Infants and animals and primitives have some use of it. Maybe we’ve been too smart. But the question ought to be reopened.”
“Speaking of philosophical questions in general,” put in the member from New Bolivar, “we have already agreed to subsidize one. Doctor Thorgsen’s project-the ballistic stellarium-eidouraniun, I should call it. The origin and destination of the universe is certainly a classic problem of metaphysics.”
“You are right,” said the Speaker. “If we follow Richard’s proposal, Doctor Thorgsen’s project should be included.”
“I suggest we did not allot Doctor Thorgsen enough credit.”
“The subsidy could be increased, but he has not spent much of it. He seems to have little talent for spending money.”
“Perhaps he needs abler assistants. There is Hargrave Caleb, and, of course, Monroe-Alpha Clifford. Monroe-Alpha is wasted in the department of finance.”
“Thorgsen knows Monroe-Alpha. Perhaps Monroe-Alpha doesn’t want to work on it.”
“Nonsense! Any man likes a job that stretches his muscles.”
“Then perhaps Thorgsen hesitated to ask him to help. Thorgsen is an essentially modest man, as is Monroe-Alpha.”
“That seems more likely.”
“In any case,” the Speaker finished, “such details are for the instigator to consider, not the whole board. Are you ready for opinion? The question is Brother Richard’s proposal in the broadest sense-I suggest that we postpone elaboration of the details of projects and methods until tomorrow and other morrows. In the meantime-does any member oppose?”
There was no opposition; there was full consent.
“So be it,” said the Speaker. He smiled. “It seems we are about to attempt to walk where Socrates stumbled.”
“Crawl, not ‘walk,'” Johann corrected. “We have limited ourselves to the experimental methods of science.”
“True, true. Well, ‘he who crawls cannot stumble.’ Now to other matters-we still have a state to govern!”
CHAPTER TWELVE
‘Whither thou goest — ”
“HOW WOULD you like,” Felix asked Phyllis, “to have a half interest in a gladiator?”
“What in the world are you talking about?”
“This undertaking of Smith Darlington’s feetball. We are going to incorporate each employee’s contract and sell it. Our agent thinks it will be a good investment, and, truthfully, I think he’s right.”
“Feetball,” repeated Phyllis meditatively. “You did say something about it, but I never understood it.”
“It’s a silly business, at best. Twenty-two men get out on a large open place and battle with their bare hands.”