In order to find out as closely as possible what is really so, or what is reality, we necessarily employ our reasoning ability in the exercise of logical thought, and the scientific method of observation.

If we can do this properly, we may come up with something that might be called "scientific morality".

Once more however we are confronted with the two philosophic orders: the subjective and the objective - one based on opinion, and the other the view that we are dealing with reality and fact.

As we learned earlier in this course, word mean things!  We must be clear as to the meaning of the words we use, if we are to communicate properly.

For this reason, we will now differentiate our arguments by using two words and not just one, when discussion the different sides of this issue.

For the purpose of clarity, we will thus stipulate that when we use the word "morality", we mean it to apply to objective, scientifically determined fact - or at least, fact determined insofar as we are able given the limits of our abilities and scope of observation.

If the word "morality" can be justified at all, it must be because we can detect and define a principle of human behavior and conduct that universally applies, can be recognized or observed by all men and women, and can be recognized or observed by each man individually who applies the same principles or rules to a cirumstance.

This universal principle must be based upon things as they are, and not upon either opinion or a theological or legal decree.  To be true, a principle must exist under all circumstances, even if there were no church or no state to invoke it.