Birthright

“What was it that led you to devote so much time to the study of my race?” asked Breece.

“So many of the sentient species are so busy blindly making war against Man that I felt that somebody ought to try to understand you.”

“I thank you for the sentiment,” said Breece. “And what have you learned about us that has increased your understanding?”

“That is a very difficult question,” said Milnor. “Oh? Why?”

“Because the more I discover about your race, the less I am able to comprehend it.” “Welcome to the club,” said Breece with a bitter laugh. “Perhaps you can enlighten me on some points,” said Milnor eagerly—or at least he looked eager. The words coming through the T-pack were totally devoid of emotion. “I'll try,” said Breece, “but please don't be too disappointed if I'm just as puzzled as you are.” “Well, for example,” said Milnor—and now they were not Man and non-Man, but merely two professionals discussing their field of expertise—"very few races of the galaxy have believed in religion, though many accept the philosophical notion of deity. Yet Man had not just one religion, but literally hundreds of them. Many of them issued very reasonable ethical codes and directives, from which most civil law on Earth, and ultimately the Commonwealth, was derived; Also, the great religious figures, from Jesus and Buddha almost to the end of human history, have preached a doctrine of love and tranquility.” “You forget Moses, who figuratively took the sword of God in his hand to slay the Egyptians.” “But even Moses did not allow his people to fight,” said Milnor, “and it was Moses who gave his nation the Ten Commandments. Now, my question is this: given such ethical codes and moral leaders, and threatening what seemed to most Men to be the very real alternative of hellfire and eternal damnation, it would seem to me that Man would have evolved socially and morally into the most peaceful and ethical of species. And yet this obviously is not the case, despite rare examples to the contrary. Can you possibly explain this to me from a Man's viewpoint?” “Not as an archaeologist, I can't,” said Breece. “But perhaps archaeology is the wrong science to apply to that question.”

“Which science would suit it better?” asked the Rinn. “Anthropology, perhaps. Or psychology. Or possibly even philosophy. At any rate, I think the answer lies in more than one place. First of all, Man was a carnivore. He still is, though he calls himself an omnivore. The conditions of ancient Earth were such that Man either had to evolve certain seemingly physically impossible abilities, such as geometrically multiplying his strength and speed, or he could develop into an intelligent being. No evolution occurs without prior environmental need, and in this case the need was for a physical equalizer, some method by which Man could kill the animals he had to kill in order to survive. This led to the creation of weapons. Some people, in fact most people, would say that all human history follows from that.”