"I should have known. Everybody is a lawyer these days. Extrapolating the statistical growth of the legal profession, by the year 2035 every single person in the United States will be a lawyer, including newborn infants. They will beborn lawyers. What do you suppose it will be like to live in such a society?"
"Professor," Evans said, "you made some interesting comments in the hall--"
"Interesting?I accused them of flagrant immorality, and you call thatinteresting? "
"I'm sorry," Evans said, trying to move the discussion toward Hoffman's views. "You didn't explain why you think--"
"I do notthink anything, young man. Iknow. That is the purpose of my research--to know things, not to surmise them. Not to theorize. Not to hypothesize. But toknow from direct research in the field. It's a lost art in academia these days, young man--you are notthat young--what is your name, anyway?"
"Peter Evans."
"And you work for Drake, Mr. Evans?"
"No, for George Morton."
"Well,why didn't you say so! " Hoffman said. "George Morton was a great,great man. Come along, Mr. Evans, and I will buy you some coffee and we can talk. Do you know what I do?"
"I'm afraid I don't, sir."
"I study the ecology of thought," Hoffman said. "And how it has led to a State of Fear."
SANTA MONICA
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13
9:33 A. M.
They were sitting on a bench across the street from the conference hall, just beyond the milling crowds near the entrance. It was a busy scene, but Hoffman ignored everything around him. He spoke rapidly, with great animation, moving his hands so wildly that he often slapped Evans in the chest, but he never seemed to notice.
"Ten years ago, I began with fashion and slang," he said, "the latter being of course a kind of verbal fashion. I wanted to know the determinants of change in fashion and speech. What I quickly found is that there are no identifiable determinants. Fashions change for arbitrary reasons and although there are regularities--cycles, periodicities, and correlations--these are merely descriptive, not explanatory. Are you following me?"
"I think so," Evans said.
"In any case, I realized that these periodicities and correlations could be regarded as systems in themselves. Or if you will, ecosystems. I tested that hypothesis and found it heuristically valuable. Just as there is an ecology of the natural world, in the forests and mountains and oceans, so too there is an ecology of the man-made world of mental abstractions, ideas, and thought. That is what I have studied."
"I see."
"Within modern culture, ideas constantly rise and fall. For a while everybody believes something, and then, bit by bit, they stop believing it. Eventually, no one can remember the old idea, the way no one can remember the old slang. Ideas are themselves a kind of fad, you see."
"I understand, Professor, but why--"
"Why do ideas fall out of favor, you are wondering?" Hoffman said. He was talking to himself. "The answer is simply--they do. In fashion, as in natural ecology, there are disruptions. Sharp revisions of the established order. A lightning fire burns down a forest. A different species springs up in the charred acreage. Accidental, haphazard, unexpected, abrupt change. That is what the world shows us on every side."
"Professor..."
"But just as ideas can change abruptly, so, too, can they hang on past their time. Some ideas continue to be embraced by the public long after scientists have abandoned them. Left brain, right brain is a perfect example. In the 1970s, it gains popularity from the work of Sperry at Caltech, who studies a specific group of brain-surgery patients. His findings have no broader meaning beyond these patients. Sperry denies any broader meaning. By 1980, it is clear that the left and right brain notion is just wrong--the two sides of the brain do not work separately in a healthy person. But in the popular culture, the concept does not die for another twenty years. People talk about it, believe it, write books about it for decades after scientists have set it aside."
"Yes, all very interesting--"
"Similarly, in environmental thought, it was widely accepted in 1960 that there is something called 'the balance of nature.' If you just left nature alone it would come into a self-maintaining state of balance. Lovely idea with a long pedigree. The Greeks believed it three thousand years ago, on the basis of nothing. Just seemed nice. "However, by 1990, no scientist believes in the balance of nature anymore. The ecologists have all given it up as simply wrong. Untrue. A fantasy. They speak now of dynamic disequilibrium, of multiple equilibrium states. But they now understand that nature isnever in balance. Never has been, never will be. On the contrary, nature is alwaysout of balance, and that means--"
"Professor," Evans said, "I'd like to ask you--"
"That means that mankind, which was formerly defined as the great disrupter of the natural order, is nothing of the sort. The whole environment is being constantly disrupted all the time anyway."
"But George Morton..."
"Yes, yes, you wonder what I discussed with George Morton. I am coming to that. We are not off topic. Because of course, Morton wanted to know about environmental ideas. And particularly the idea of environmental crisis."