“No. I don't think that you were working wrong. It would be very strange if I thought so. But understand: subjectively you dreamed and thought, but objectively you did only what the possibilities of the discovery permitted you to do. And that's the point! You have to coordinate your plans with the possibilities of the work. And you were hoping to counterbalance a hundred billion varied acts of humanity a day with your little machine. And it's those hundred billion, plus uncounted past actions, that determine the social processes on earth, their goodness and evil. All of science is incapable of counterbalancing those mighty processes, that avalanche of acts and deeds, first of all because science makes up a small part of life on earth, and secondly because that is not its specialty. Science doesn't develop good or evil — it develops new information and gives new opportunities. And that's all. Now the application of that information and the use of the opportunities determine the above — mentioned social processes and powers. We will give people nothing more than new opportunities to produce people in their own image, and it's up to them to use these opportunities to their benefit or harm or not at all.”
“You mean we should publish the discovery and wash our hands of it? Well, I never! If we don't give a damn what happens to it, certainly no one else will!”
“Don't be angry. I don't think we should publish and wash our hands of it. We have to go on working, studying the possibilities the way everyone does. But in the research, and the ideas, even in the dreams on project 154, you must keep in mind that what happens to this project in real life depends primarily on life itself, or to put it in a more cultured way, on the socio — political situation in the world. If the situation develops in a safe, good direction, then we can publish. If not — we'll have to hold off or destroy the project, as foreseen by the vow. It's not in our power to save humanity, but it is in our power not to inflict any harm on it.”
“Hm. that's very modest. I think you're underestimating the possibilities of modern science. We now have the capability of destroying humanity by pushing a button — or several buttons. Why shouldn't there be an alternative method to save or at least protect humanity by pushing a button? And why, damn it, shouldn't that method be in our field of research?”
“It doesn't lie there. Our direction is constructive. It's much, much harder to build a bridge than to blow it up.”
“I agree. But they do build bridges.”
“But no one's built a bridge that can't be blown up.”
We found ourselves at a dead end.
But he's okay. He essentially laid out all my vague doubts in a clear — cut fashion; they had been bothering me for a long time. I don't know whether to be happy or sad.
December 28. So, it's been a year since I sat in the new lab on an unpacked impulse generator and thought about an indefinite experiment. Just a year? No, time is measured by events and not by the rotation of the earth. I think at least a decade has passed. And not only because so much was done — there was so much experienced. I've started thinking about life more, understanding myself and others better, I've even changed a little — pray God, for the better.
And still there is a dissatisfaction — too much dreaming, I suppose. Everything that I've thought of has happened, but the wrong way somehow: with difficulties, with horrible complications, with disillusionment. That's the way it is in life. Man never dreams about where he could fall flat on his face or find disillusionment; that happens on its own. I understand that perfectly well with my mind, but I still can't resign myself to it.
When I was synthesizing double number 3 (Kravets in civilian life), I hoped vaguely that something would click in the computer — womb and I would get a knight without fear or flaw! Nothing clicked. He's fine, can't argue with that, but he's no knight. He's sober — minded, reasonable, and careful. And where was the knight supposed to come from — me?
Jerk, dreamy jerk! You keep hoping that nature will find and hand you the absolutely dependable method — it never will. It doesn't have that information.
Damn, is it really impossible? Is the perfected Krivoshein — Kravets really right?
There is one method of saving the world by pushing a button; it can be used in case of thermonuclear war. You hide several computer — wombs that have been fed information on people (men and women) deep in a mine shaft with a large supply of reagents. And if there are no people left in the ashes of the earth, the computers will save and resurrect humanity. That's one way out of the situation.