...of that late afternoon in the library (overlooking the street). "You've known her since your days together at Harvard," he noted, "How would you characterize her?" Quite simply (as advised by our attorneys), "She is brilliant, and impassioned." But whether the science has compromised her ethics, or her ethics have compromised the science... "Are you convinced she's made that distinction?" (An interesting conundrum. But nonetheless...) "She is an embodiment of both," I insist, "as demanded by her inimitable pursuit. An impassioned scientist; a brilliant ethicist." ...but with a singular perspective on the universal dogma. Discretely parallel (in a non-Euclidean sense) -- the brilliance and the passion interchangeable. So... "There is no distinction, nor has there ever been." Since our days together at Harvard. And that late afternoon in the library. Overlooking the street.