 Alright, we're back here with Behaviour Bees Part 2. Well, I probably shouldn't announce the numbers, because it'll be really sad when you get to 753, and I can't remember what the next one is. So, no, Behaviour Bees, here we go. Attitudes of science, folks. I, you know, there's a lot of different ways to take this one, so I'm gonna hit a few of the points. We're gonna do it really quickly, so refer to some other texts for more in-depth information, but hopefully I'll present it in a way that you understand. The first thing, first, is you need to understand as I can speak really fast. So, the beauty about being on YouTube is the fact that you can rewind me, and you can just play me over and over again, because I can speak about this whole thing done. I can go through your entire book in about 30 seconds, but you're not gonna know that. It's not gonna work well. So, anyway, I digress as always. If you've watched enough videos now, you know that. So, the first things first, we have attitudes of science. What is it? Let's see, the number one thing. Absolute number one thing, number one thing. Determinism. Stuff isn't willy-nilly, folks. Something leads to something else, alright? So, one event, physical event, something in nature, then leads to something else, alright? So, an outcome. So, some people would call those causes. We're gonna call those functional relations, alright? There's reasons for that. I'm not gonna get into it right now. You can dig into that if you wanna know. But basically, if you wanna colloquially speaking, and we're talking about cause, one event leads to another event. It's that simple. The type of determinism we're talking about is not strict determinism. It doesn't have to be the event and then connected in the chain to the next event. We are talking about things that could be spread out over weeks, months, years, decades, alright? So, something that happened to you a long time ago might be affecting what you're doing today, alright? So, that's entirely possible. It's totally normal, and that's a type of determinism. So, that's one attitude that we wanna have. We're gonna look for those connections. The next thing is empiricism. Super important. In other words, we're going to observe it in some way, shape, or form in a way that other people can observe, too. We're not just gonna say, well, I think it happened. We're gonna have direct evidence for it, and we're gonna have people double checking us, alright? So, the key with empiricism to be empirical is to observe something and then talk about it, write about it in a way that someone else can observe it, too. That gets us back to believability, to inter-observer agreement. Those types of things will come back to all of those topics, but they are all interrelated. The next thing I wanna talk about, experimentation, alright? So, experimentation is an attitude in science about we're going to discover things about our world using procedures, alright? Those particular procedures can be experimental. They can be quasi-experimental. They can be relational. They can be descriptive. There's all sorts of things here, but when we talk about experimentation, what we're talking about is aligning events, aligning phenomena or variables, whatever they are, in a way that allows us to make comparisons, alright? So, we compare one variable to another. You know, for example, recording videos today, if we could control the lighting, we might get different effects in how we do the recording or in the types of recording that we do, alright? So, as a result, we can do an experiment about those different light types. This gives us, if we do the experiments properly, it allows us to draw conclusions about cause and effect, about functional relations, sorry. I just gotta stop saying cause and effect. It's really about functional relations, which I know it sounds pedantic and nitpicky and all that stuff, but there's a reason that we use the term functional relations. So, another attitude here, replication, which doesn't really sound like an attitude more like a procedure, but when you think about it from the perspective that we think about it from, it is an attitude, right? We need to replicate our findings, just once isn't enough, right? So, we wanna replicate our findings in different labs, different scenarios, different people, different researchers, different times, different decades. We want replication, folks. The more that we can get something, a repeated effect, the more we can understand the limits of that effect, and we can use things like systematic replication, direct replication, again, we'll get into all that stuff. But we need things to be replicated in order for stuff to be believable, alright? Believability is what, it all comes back a lot to believability. Another attitude that is, wow, it was taught to me as really important, but then also a slightly overrated, parsimony. Sometimes stuff is complex, right? But let's back up. Parsimony is considered a law in science, and I put law in quotes because you are right. The point is simple, that with parsimony, if we have two explanations, the explanation that is more simple is the one that we prefer to test for first, right? Doesn't mean that it's the right one. It means that we're getting, that we prefer to work with that one initially. Over time, we might find out that that one's not accurate, and we go with a more complex thing, but parsimony states that we're gonna take the most simple approach first. K-I-S-S, keep it simple, stupid, that's what we're after, right? Parsimony can be a wee bit overrated, but don't worry about that right now, we'll come back to it, and if you really want some fun, go look up Clever Hans, alright? So anyway, last point before we get out of here for the day is going to be a philosophic doubt. A scientist's attitude involves philosophic doubt at a very deep level. All of the stuff that we've talked about to this point in this video contributes to the concept of philosophic doubt, which is basically where we're just gonna question everything all the time. We're not gonna assume the status quo. We're not gonna assume it's right. We're not gonna assume it's perfect. We're gonna assume there's more information out there. We're gonna assume that we don't have the big picture. We're gonna assume that there's more work to do, to understand our world, to understand nature, to describe it, to predict it and to control it. So we're gonna take that philosophic doubt to make sure we improve all of those processes throughout our careers and throughout the existence of humanity and science as a whole. I think I just took a big chunk out of the world. See y'all later, bye.