DOCSLIB.ORG

The Great Chain of Being

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Great Chain of Being 26.5 essay 429 MH 23/5/05 9:59 AM Page 429 NATURE|Vol 435|26 May 2005 ESSAY The great chain of being Our persistence in placing ourselves at the top of the Great Chain of Being suggests we have some deep psychological need to see ourselves as the culmination of creation. Sean Nee medieval theologian, albeit with some nov- Changes in ocean ecosystems wrought elties and the startling omission of God. by Bacteria and Archaea contributed to For centuries the ‘great chain of being’ held By starting with us, Dawkins regenerates the deposition of the ocean sediments, an a central place in Western thought. This the chain because species that are more event of enormous significance: these sed- view saw the Universe as ordered in a lin- closely related to us are more similar as iments became the habitat for bacteria that ear sequence starting from the inanimate well, and such similarity was an important now constitute about one-third of the total world of rocks. Plants came next, then ani- criterion in determining the rankings in living biomass today. (A side-effect of the mals, men, angels and, finally, God. It was the classical chain. But there is nothing deposition is the oxygenation of the very detailed with, for example, a ranking about the world that compels us to think atmosphere by photosynthetic bacteria.) of human races; humans them- Evolution continued for bil- selves ranked above apes above lions of years, with many remark- reptiles above amphibians above Human able innovations stimulated by fish. This view even predicted a both cooperation and conflict. world of invisible life in between Ape For example, Bacteria evolved the the inanimate and the visible, liv- capacity to communicate chemi- ing world, long before Antonie Reptile cally to coordinate attacks on oth- van Leeuwenhoek’s discoveries. ers, and a willingness to commit Amphibian Although advocates of evolution suicide for the greater good of the may have stripped it of its super- community. Around a billion natural summit, this view is with Fish years ago, a great experiment us still. occurred: Bacteria and Archaea Common presentations of evo- Amphibian came together in a fusion event to lution mirror the great chain by synthesize a whole new domain viewing the process as progres- Reptile of life, the Eukarya. Sadly, the out- sive. For example, in their book come was rather uninteresting: The Major Transitions in Evolu- Ape the resulting organisms displayed tion, John Maynard Smith and a very limited metabolic reper- Eors Szathmáry take us from the Human toire and much restricted habitat origin of life, through to the origin requirements. of eukaryotic cells, multicellular- Fish Over the past 600 million years ity, human societies and, finally, of the Bacteria, Archaea and micro- language. They explicitly point Although both representations are equally valid, we instinctively bial Eukarya have continued to out that evolution does not neces- position ourselves at the top of phylogenetic trees (upper panel). evolve into brand new niches. As sarily lead to progress, and even it happens, a few branches of refer to the great chain by its Latin name, about it in this way, suggesting, instead, Eukarya —plants and animals — grew scala naturae. But it is impossible to over- that we have some deep psychological need freakishly huge bodies. They also created look the fact that the ‘major’ evolutionary to see ourselves as the culmination of cre- both new substances for bacteria to transitions lead inexorably, step by step, to ation. Illustrating this, when we represent exploit, such as plant lignins, and new us. Similarly, in their recent essay in Nature, the relationships between species, includ- environments for microbes to inhabit, ‘Climbing the co-evolution ladder’ (431, ing ourselves, in a family tree, we automat- such as feathers and urinary tracts. Indeed, 913; 2004), Lenton and colleagues illustrate ically construct it so that the column of some of the richest and most interesting their summary of life–environment inter- species’ names forms a chain with us as the ecologies on Earth can be found inside the actions through the ages with a ladder top, as in the first of the trees pictured. But animal gut. whose rungs progress through microbes, the other construction is equally valid. One of the huge species, Homo sapiens, plants, and, at the top, large animals. Here is another view of evolution, but got remarkably self-important. But when, In his recent book The Ancestor’s Tale, this time from the point of view of microbes to his surprise, a virus wiped him out, most Richard Dawkins reverses the usual tempo- — the main form of life on our planet. From of life on Earth took no notice at all. ■ ral perspective and looks progressively fur- the mists of time, nearly 4 billion years Sean Nee is at the Institute of Evolutionary ther back in time to find our ancestors. Like ago, three great domains of life emerged: Biology, School of Biological Sciences, Maynard Smith and Szathmáry, he cautions Bacteria, Archaea, and the molecular University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, us against thinking that evolution is pro- parasites of these, such as viruses. Over Edinburgh EH9 3JT, UK. gressive, culminating with us. He empha- hundreds of millions of years the Bacteria FURTHER READING sizes that with whatever organism we begin evolved an extraordinary variety of bio- Lovejoy, A. O. The Great Chain of Being (Harper and the pilgrimage back through time, we all are chemical capabilities, including the ability Row, New York, 1965). reunited at the origin of life. But by begin- to generate light, and to ‘eat’ and ‘breathe’ Gee, H. Nature 420, 611 (2002). ning the journey with us and looking metals. The Archaea also evolved remark- Maynard Smith, J. & Szathmáry, E. The Major Transitions of Evolution (W. H. Freeman & Co., Oxford, 1995). backwards along our ancestry, Dawkins able capacities to thrive in every environ- Dawkins, R. The Ancestor’s Tale (Weidenfeld & generates a sequence of chapter titles ment available, including superheated, Nicolson, New York, 2004). that would read like a typical chain to a pressurized water deep in the oceans. Nee, S. Nature 429, 804–805 (2004). 429 © 2005 Nature Publishing Group.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • John Hill (1714?–1775) on 'Plant Sleep'
    Annals of Science ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tasc20 John Hill (1714?–1775) on ‘Plant Sleep’: experimental physiology and the limits of comparative analysis Justin Begley To cite this article: Justin Begley (2020): John Hill (1714?–1775) on ‘Plant Sleep’: experimental physiology and the limits of comparative analysis, Annals of Science, DOI: 10.1080/00033790.2020.1813807 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2020.1813807 © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 12 Sep 2020. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tasc20 ANNALS OF SCIENCE https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2020.1813807 John Hill (1714?–1775) on ‘Plant Sleep’: experimental physiology and the limits of comparative analysis Justin Begley Department of Philosophy, History, and Art, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY The phenomenon of ‘plant sleep’–whereby vegetables Received 1 October 2019 rhythmically open and close their leaves or petals in Accepted 18 August 2020 daily cycles – has been a continual source of fascination KEYWORDS for those with botanical interests, from the Portuguese Royal Society; history of physician Cristóbal Acosta and the Italian naturalist botany; John Hill; Prospero Alpini in the sixteenth century to Percy Bysshe experimentation; natural Shelley and Charles Darwin in the nineteenth. But it was history in 1757 that the topic received its earliest systemic treatment on English shores with the prodigious author, botanist, actor, and Royal Society critic John Hill’s The Sleep of Plants, and Cause of Motion in the Sensitive Plant.
    [Show full text]
  • Leibniz on Whether the World Increases in Perfection
    LEIBNIZ ON WHETHER THE WORLD INCREASES IN PERFECTION Lloyd Strickland In a letter to Bourguet written on 5 August 1715, a little over a year before his death, Leibniz suggests that, on the question of the world’s perfection, ‘Two hypotheses can be formed – one that nature is equally perfect, the other that it always increases in perfection.’ (L664)1 He then proceeds to split the second option into two further 1 The abbreviations I use throughout when citing Leibniz are as follows: A = Sämtliche schriften und briefe, ed by Akademie der Wissenschaften, multiple volumes in 6 series, cited by series (reihe) and volume (band) (Berlin, 1923-). AG = Philosophical essays, trans & ed by Roger Ariew & Daniel Garber (Indianapolis, 1989). D = De summa rerum, trans by G. H. R. Parkinson (New Haven, 1992). DM = Discourse on metaphysics, cited by section number, various translations in AG, L, P, W etc. Dn = The philosophical works of Leibnitz, trans & ed George Martin Duncan (New Haven, 1908). E = Opera Philosophica, ed by J. E. Erdmann (Berlin, 1840). G = Die philosophiscen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, ed by C. I. Gerhardt, 7 vols (Berlin, 1875-1890). GM = G. W. Leibniz: Mathematische Schriften, ed by C. I. Gerhardt, 7 vols (Berlin, 1962). Gr = Textes inédits, ed by Gaston Grua, 2 vols with successive pagination (Paris, 1948). H = Theodicy, trans by E. M. Huggard (Chicago, 1990). L = Philosophical papers and letters, trans & ed Leroy E. Loemker (Dordrecht, 2ed 1969). Mon = Monadology, cited by section number, various translations in AG, L, P, W etc. NE = New essays concerning human understanding, trans & ed by Peter Remnant & Jonathan Bennett (Cambridge, 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Staying Optimistic: the Trials and Tribulations of Leibnizian Optimism
    Strickland, Lloyd 2019 Staying Optimistic: The Trials and Tribulations of Leibnizian Optimism. Journal of Modern Philosophy, 1(1): 3, pp. 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32881/jomp.3 RESEARCH Staying Optimistic: The Trials and Tribulations of Leibnizian Optimism Lloyd Strickland Manchester Metropolitan University, GB [email protected] The oft-told story of Leibniz’s doctrine of the best world, or optimism, is that it enjoyed a great deal of popularity in the eighteenth century until the massive earthquake that struck Lisbon on 1 November 1755 destroyed its support. Despite its long history, this story is nothing more than a commentators’ fiction that has become accepted wisdom not through sheer weight of evidence but through sheer frequency of repetition. In this paper we shall examine the reception of Leibniz’s doctrine of the best world in the eighteenth century in order to get a clearer understanding of what its fate really was. As we shall see, while Leibniz’s doctrine did win a good number of adherents in the 1720s and 1730s, especially in Germany, support for it had largely dried up by the mid-1740s; moreover, while opponents of Leibniz’s doctrine were few and far between in the 1710s and 1720s, they became increasing vocal in the 1730s and afterwards, between them producing an array of objections that served to make Leibnizian optimism both philosophically and theologically toxic years before the Lisbon earthquake struck. Keywords: Leibniz; Optimism; Best world; Lisbon earthquake; Evil; Wolff The oft-told story of Leibniz’s doctrine of the best world, or optimism, is that it enjoyed a great deal of popularity in the eighteenth century until the massive earthquake that struck Lisbon on 1 November 1755 destroyed its support.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Leibniz on Whether the World Increases In
    British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14(1) 2006: 51 – 68 ARTICLE LEIBNIZ ON WHETHER THE WORLD INCREASES IN PERFECTION Lloyd Strickland In a letter to Bourguet written on 5 August 1715, a little over a year before his death, Leibniz suggests that, on the question of the world’s perfection, ‘Two hypotheses can be formed – one that nature is always equally perfect, the other that it always increases in perfection’ (L664).1 He then proceeds to split the second option into two further hypotheses: first, that the world has been increasing in perfection since its inception at a first moment; and second, that it has been increasing in perfection from all eternity. He illustrates these alternatives by means of the following diagrams: 1The abbreviations I use throughout when citing Leibniz are as follows: A ¼ Sa¨mtliche Schriften und Briefe, edited by Akademie der Wissenschaften, multiple Vols in six series, cited by series (reihe) and volume (band) (Berlin, 1923–). AG ¼ Philosophical Essays, translated and edited by Roger Ariew and Daniel Garber (Indianapolis, 1989). D ¼ De Summa Rerum, translated by G. H. R. Parkinson (New Haven, 1992). DM ¼ Discourse on Metaphysics, cited by section number, various translations in AG, L, P, W, etc. Dn ¼ The Philosophical Works of Leibnitz, translated and edited by George Martin Duncan (New Haven, 1908). E ¼ Opera Philosophica, edited by J. E. Erdmann (Berlin, 1840). G ¼ Die philosophiscen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, edited by C. I. Gerhardt, 7 Vols (Berlin, 1875–90). GM ¼ G. W. Leibniz: Mathematische Schriften, edited by C. I. Gerhardt, 7 Vols (Berlin, 1962).
    [Show full text]
  • Great Chain of Being
    Great Chain of Being The great chain of being is a strict, religious hierarchical structure of all matter and life, believed to have been decreed by God. The chain starts from God and progresses downward to angels, demons (fallen/renegade angels), stars, moon, kings, princes, nobles, commoners, wild animals, domesticated animals, trees, other plants, precious stones, precious metals, and other minerals. Each link in the chain might be divided further into its component parts. The chain of being is composed of a great number of hierarchical links, from the most basic and foundational elements up through the very highest perfection, in other words, God. God sits at the top of the chain, and beneath him sit the angels, both existing wholly in spirit form. Earthly flesh is fallible and ever-changing, mutable. Spirit, however, is unchanging and permanent. This sense of permanence is crucial to understanding this conception of reality. It is generally impossible to change the position of an object in the hierarchy. (One exception might be in the realm of alchemy, where alchemists attempted to transmute base elements, such as lead, into higher elements, either silver or, more often, gold the highest element.) In the natural order, earth (rock) is at the bottom of the chain; this element possesses only the attribute of existence. Each link succeeding upward contains the positive attributes of the previous link and adds at least one other. Rocks possess only existence; the next link up is plants which possess life and existence. Animals add motion and appetite as well. Man is both mortal flesh, as those below him, and also spirit, as those above.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Chain of Being Is Still Here Emanuele Rigato*† and Alessandro Minelli†
    Rigato and Minelli Evolution: Education and Outreach 2013, 6:18 http://www.evolution-outreach.com/content/6/1/18 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access The great chain of being is still here Emanuele Rigato*† and Alessandro Minelli† Abstract Background: Professional papers in evolutionary biology continue to host expressions in agreement with the pre- evolutionary metaphor of the scala naturae (the great chain of being), when contrasting ‘lower’ to ‘higher’ representatives of a given branch of the tree of life. How pervasive is the persistence of progressionist, pre- evolutionary language in contemporary papers? Results: We document here the prevalence of this unexpected linguistic survival in papers published between 2005 and 2010 by 16 top scientific journals, including generalist magazines and specialist journals in evolutionary biology. Out of a total of 67,413 papers, the unexpectedly high figure of 1,287 (1.91%) returned positive hits from our search for scala naturae language. Conclusions: A quantitative appreciation of the survival of progressionist language in scientific papers is the first step towards its eradication. This will obtain by improving skills in tree thinking as well as by more careful editorial policy. Keywords: Scala naturae, Evolutionary trends, Tree thinking, Bibliometric analysis Background biology in particular, any survival of scala naturae The scala naturae, or great chain of being (Lovejoy 1936), thinking, or of the corresponding language. These ex- as presented by Charles Bonnet in his Insectologie (Bonnet pectations,
    [Show full text]
  • The Theory of the Great Chain of Being (GCB) Revisited: the Case of GCB-Level-Conditioned Animal Terms Robert Kiełtyka, University of Rzeszów
    313 The theory of the Great Chain of Being (GCB) revisited: The case of GCB-level-conditioned animal terms Robert Kiełtyka, University of Rzeszów Abstract The Great Chain of Being is known as a model of the organization and perception of the surrounding reality which is deeply rooted in the European tradition and which relies on the fact that all the material/physical and spiritual entities create a hierarchy ranked from the lowest entities/beings to those occupying the highest level of the hierarchy. The Great Chain of Being and the processes it involves play an important role in the analysis of semantic change. For example, such cognitive mechanisms as anthropomorphisation and zoomorphisation understood as ascribing human or animal features to entities from the levels below and above humans or animals, are held responsible for the mechanism of zoosemy. Zoosemy is defined in the literature of the subject as a type of animal metaphor which is universally linked to evaluative changes in meaning, especially meaning pejoration. In this paper an attempt will be made to shed some light on one of the sub-types of zoosemy interpreted as an interface between a metaphorical schema and a metonymic mapping. Keywords: zoosemy, Great Chain of Being, metaphor, metonymy 1 Introduction The theoretical bases of the concept of the Great Chain of Being were developed in Antiquity by such ancient philosophers as Plato and Aristotle (cf. Nisbet 1982: 35), and it is worth mentioning that the GCB has not merely survived into our times but – more importantly – elements of its mechanism are reflected in various evolutionary theories and, recently, also in semantic investigations of natural languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Echoes of Leibniz in Pope's Essay On
    Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee Volume 8 Issue 1 Article 3 January 2017 Echoes of Leibniz in Pope’s Essay on Man: Criticism and Cultural Shift in the Eighteenth Century Sierra Billingslea [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit Part of the Continental Philosophy Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, Literature in English, British Isles Commons, and the Other Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Billingslea, Sierra (2017) "Echoes of Leibniz in Pope’s Essay on Man: Criticism and Cultural Shift in the Eighteenth Century," Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee: Vol. 8 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit/vol8/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit. Pursuit: The Journal of Undergraduate Research at the University of Tennessee Volume 8, Issue 1 (2017) PURSUIT Echoes of Leibniz in Pope’s Essay on Man: Criticism and Cultural Shift in the Eighteenth Century SIERRA BILLINGSLEA Towson University, Towson, MD [email protected] Advisor: Dr. George Hahn This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    [Show full text]
  • Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and the Place of Irritability in the History of Life and Death
    Chapter 2 Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and the Place of Irritability in the History of Life and Death Guido Giglioni M. de Lamarck séparait la vie d’avec la nature. La nature, à ses yeux, c’était la pierre et la cendre, le granit de la tombe, la mort! La vie n’y intervenait que comme un accident étrange et singulièrement industrieux, une lutte prolongée, avec plus ou moins de succès et d’équilibre çà et là, mais toujours fi nalement vaincue; l’immobilité froide était régnante après comme devant. Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, Volupté, 1834 Et metuunt magni naturam credere mundi exitiale aliquod tempus clademque manere, cum videant tantam terrarum incumbere molem! Lucretius, De rerum natura, VI, 565–567 Abstract In the history of philosophy and science, vitalism has a bad reputation, for the very defi nition of life remains remorselessly murky. And yet life also resists all attempts at reduction carried out by the logic of mechanical reason. While on a superfi cial level, life smacks of irrational exuberance, on a deeper level, it is in the very uncomfortable company of death. In this chapter, I argue that this ambivalence is particularly evident in Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s natural philosophy. In his chemi- cal, geological, botanical and zoological views, Lamarck advocated a theory of decaying rather than living matter. He characterized orgasm, irritability and sensi- bility – the forms which life takes on in the physical universe – as momentary inter- ruptions of nature’s ordinary course toward death and destruction. This chapter examines Lamarck’s notion of irritability, paying special attention to his concept of “intussusception.” By intussusception, Lamarck meant a universal mechanism of G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Chain of Being
    Historical Background Plato (427-347 BC) – Believed in 2 worlds: the real world (ideal and eternal), and an illusionary world (imperfect and perceived through the senses). Typological view of nature – individual variation as the imperfect manifestation of ethos. Aristotle (384-322 BC) – Believed that all living organisms could be arranged in a “scale of nature” or Great Chain of Being. The ladder of life consists of graduation from inanimate material through plants, through lower animals and humans to other spiritual beings. The Great Chain of Being Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778) – Established the modern system of taxonomy in an attempt to discover order in the diversity of life “for the greater glory of God”. Groupings based on similarity . Hierarchal relationships of organisms 1 Early Ideas About Evolution . Earth formed according to laws of physics and chemistry . Older than previously thought . Life emerggyped as distinct types . Transformed when environment changed Georges Buffon (1707-88) Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck 1809 Philosophie Zoologique First articulated theory of evolution: . Organisms continually arise by spontaneous generation. “Nervous fluid” acts to move each species up the “great chain of being”. Organisms develop adaptations to changing environment through the use and disuse of organs. (Heavy use attracts more “nervous fluid”.) . Acquired characteristics are inherited. LAMARCKIAN EVOLUTION “Chain of Being” ORGANIZATION F SCALE O SCALE TIME 2 Problems with Lamarck’s ideas: 1) There is no evidence of spontaneous generation. 2) There is no evidence of an innate drive toward complexity. - E. coli - Parasites - Cave dwelling organisms 3) There is no evidence of inheritance of acquired characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophical Origins of Vegetarianism: Greek Philosophers and Animal World
    The Philosophical Origins of Vegetarianism Greek Philosophers and Animal World Letterio Mauro Full Professor of History of Philosophy, University of Genoa DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7358/rela-2017-001-maur [email protected] ABSTRACT Coeval philosophical texts provide no information about the extent to which the Ancient World practiced vegetarianism or about its concrete aspects. However, they offer a rich array of the arguments used to both justify and promote it. The present paper will focus on the four main philosophical arguments in favor of vegetarianism. These arguments were proposed and revised by various authors. The four arguments that will be studied are: the ascetic-religious one, mainly used by the Orphic tradition and then taken up by various authors, especially the Pythagoreans; the one based on the biopsychological affinity of all living beings, and coher- ently promoted by Theophrastus; the one based on the dignity and value of the animal world, widely developed especially by Plutarch; and finally the one, central to Porphyry’s treatise, that relates abstinence from meat to the need of the soul to elevate itself to the divine and be purified of any element linking it to the body. Keywords: vegetarianism, animals in antiquity, philosophical anthropology, Or- phism, Pythagoreanism, Neoplatonism, Middleplatonism, philosophical lifestyle in antiquity, sacrifices of animals, dignity and value of the animal world. 1. THE FOUR MAIN ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF VEGETARIANISM IN THE ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY Coeval philosophical texts provide no information about the extent to which the Ancient World practiced vegetarianism or about its concrete aspects. However, they offer a rich array of the arguments used to both justify and promote it (Haussleiter 1935).
    [Show full text]
  • How Nonhuman Animals Were Trapped in a Nonexistent Universe
    HOW NONHUMAN ANIMALS WERE TRAPPED IN A NONEXISTENT UNIVERSE By STEVEN M. WISE* The first in a series of articles by the author whose overall purpose is to explain why legal rights need not be restricted to human beings and why a handful of rights that protect fundamental interests of human beings should also protect the fundamental interests of such nonhuman animals as chimpanzees and bonobos. The second article in this series traces the devel- opment of the common law as it concerns the relationshipsbetween human and nonhuman animals from its beginnings in the Mesopotamian "law code" of the third and second millennia, B.C. until today. I. INTRODUCTION In a famous lecture, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. emphasized the importance of the knowledge of history to an ability rationally to ana- lyze the present value of legal principles. In Holmes' view, an under- standing of history "is the first step toward an enlightened scepticism, that is, toward a deliberatereconsideration of the worth of those rules"; the alternative is mere "blind imitation of the past."1 As "fliaw is a scavenger... [that] grows by feeding on ideas from outside, not by inventing new ones of its own,"2 its history and evolution intimately * Steven M. Wise is president of Fraser & Wise, P.C., in Boston, Massachusetts. He has been an officer of the Animal Legal Defense Fund since 1982 and has taught "Animal Rights Law" as an adjunct professor at the Vermont Law School since 1990. 1 The rational study of law is still to a large extent the study of history.
    [Show full text]