So I'm going to do something different.

I look for and try to understand, okay, I'm a medical doctor, I like to make sure I get the diagnosis right.

And in order to get the diagnosis right, you sometimes have to take what's being said,

and you have to kind of analyze it pretty thoroughly to make sure that you're getting the diagnosis right because you can offer

all kinds of therapies, but if you don't have the diagnosis right, then you're going to make

mistakes. And so what I try to do in all of my work is I try to understand what would we have

to believe about the human being, or in this case, what will we have to believe about morality and the human being,

in order for some of our claims,

our scientific claims, to be true.

Okay?

And so we're going to take some of these concepts apart,

and we're going to look at what holds them together.

Okay?

All right.

So, let's get going. All right. I like to start with a couple of quotes from Pallani, Mikhail Pallani. He was a physical chemist. Then he started studying philosophy. He has a brother named Carl Pallani, and Carl Polani was a historian of economics, economic philosophy. A really brilliant family. He says, scientific maxims and the art of interpreting them may be said to constitute the premises of science. But I prefer to call them our scientific beliefs. These premises, or beliefs, are embodied in a

tradition, the tradition of science. Now, this goes fundamentally against what science has always

thought about itself, which is we're throwing off tradition in order to get to the truth of the

matter. We're throwing off tradition. But Pilani, a physical chemist.

Actually, out of his lab, came two Nobel laureates.

So two of his students became Nobel laureates.

So he says, hey, we have a tradition, and we have beliefs as scientists.

Okay.

...