Theory and Training in Epictetus' Program of Moral Education

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Theory and Training in Epictetus' Program of Moral Education THEORY AND TRAINING IN EPICTETUS’ PROGRAM OF MORAL EDUCATION by Michael Tremblay A thesis submitted to the Department of Philosophy In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (May, 2021) Copyright ©Michael Tremblay, 2021 Abstract This dissertation examines the educational function of training, as contrasted with the study of theory, within Epictetus’ program of moral education. The motivation for this research is that there exists an apparent tension in Epictetus’ moral philosophy. According to Stoicism, knowledge is sufficient for virtue; however, many students of Stoicism have learnt that virtue is the only good, and endorsed this claim as true, and yet fail to act appropriately. Epictetus seems to resolve this problem through the introduction of applied exercises. That Epictetus requires his students to train themselves in this way seems in potential conflict with his moral psychology. In this dissertation, I resolve this tension through three contributions: (1) First, I develop an account of why Epictetus believes moral failure occurs in dedicated students of Stoicism who wish to achieve virtue. It occurs primarily because of two factors, precipitancy and weakness, which impede the progressing student of Stoicism from properly reflecting upon a situation. (2) Second, I argue for a novel explanation of the function of training in Epictetus. Epictetus tells us that training is necessary to ‘digest’ our theory. Building upon this neglected metaphor, I argue that the ‘digestion’ of theory is the process by which students move from weak commitments to general principles (i.e., virtue is the only good), which are vulnerable to instances of precipitancy or weakness, to specific actionable beliefs (i.e., I should not desire this bribe because is not an instance of virtue). (3) Lastly, I demonstrate, by way of examples, the function of Epictetus’ applied training exercises. These exercises are shown to facilitate the ‘digestion’ of theory by mitigating weakness and precipitancy. This explanation accounts both for why these exercises are considered necessary, and why they do not conflict with Epictetus’ psychological commitments. ii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I am extremely grateful to my supervisor, Jon Miller, who welcomed me to Queen’s and provided the support, encouragement, and advice required to undertake this project. I am especially thankful to Jon for two important reminders: First, that the study of philosophy should first and foremost be done for its own inherent rewards, and second, to quote Spinoza, that all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare. I would also like to thank Stephen Leighton and Daryn Lehoux for their contributions to this thesis. Both graciously offered to me their time and insight and helped to improve my understanding of Ancient philosophy and culture. I also would like to thank my thesis examiners, Brad Inwood, Elliot Paul, and Bernard Kavanaugh, for their incredibly helpful and insightful questions and comments. I want to thank all the members of the Queen’s Philosophy department more generally, including the professors, administrators, and students, who made Queen’s a wonderful place to complete a PhD, both intellectually and socially. To name a few, I am grateful for the mentorship, advice, and help provided by Christine Sypnowich, David Bakhurst and Elliot Paul, all of whom went above and beyond to offer support when I needed it. I also want to thank the Queen’s Classics Department and its Greek and Latin students and professors, particularly Tim Wright, for welcoming me and helping me to discover the absolute joy of philology, which I never expected to find but am so glad that I have. I am grateful all my teammates and coaches at the Queen’s Wrestling team and Hayabusa Academy, especially Chris and Janet. It is through training with all of you that I found the community, friendship, and reprieve from study which was required to complete this project. I want to thank my partner Mandy, who has been a pillar of support and a source of inspiration during this process, and who has taught me as much about being a serious scholar as anyone else. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my parents, Peter and Sandy, and my sister, Alison, and my late Grandmother, Peg. This thesis would not have been possible without their unwavering support. They encouraged me each step of the way, and this thesis is as much a result of their hard work as my own. iii Table of Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... iii List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... vi Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 Epictetus’ Moral Psychology ...................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 10 2.2 Prohairesis ......................................................................................................................................... 13 2.3 Rationalism ........................................................................................................................................ 23 2.4 Preconceptions ................................................................................................................................... 32 2.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Chapter 3 Epictetus’ Program of Moral Education ..................................................................................... 40 3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 40 3.2 Topic 1: Desire and Aversion ............................................................................................................ 45 3.3 Topic 2: Motives to Act ..................................................................................................................... 51 3.4 Topic 3: Assent .................................................................................................................................. 61 3.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 66 Chapter 4 Moral Failure ............................................................................................................................... 69 4.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 69 4.2 First Cause of Moral Failure: Studying the Topoi incorrectly ........................................................... 71 4.3 Second Cause of Moral Failure: Weakness ....................................................................................... 81 4.4 Third Cause of Moral Failure: Precipitancy ...................................................................................... 86 4.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 89 Chapter 5 The Limits of Theory .................................................................................................................. 90 5.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 90 5.2 The Limits of Theory ......................................................................................................................... 91 5.3 The Introduction of Training ............................................................................................................. 98 5.4 Concerns About a Reliance on Training .......................................................................................... 109 5.5 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 113 Chapter 6 Digesting Theory ....................................................................................................................... 115 6.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 115 6.2 Ancient Medical Conceptions of Digestion ..................................................................................... 116 6.3 Digestion in Epictetus ...................................................................................................................... 122 iv 6.4 The Nature of Digestion .................................................................................................................. 128 6.5 The Necessity of Training ..............................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • A Synthetic Approach to the Ground of Global Justice
    ISSN 2392-0890, no 8/2017, pp. 54-62, DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0012.0388 Modern Stoicism and the Responsibility for the Global Polis PIOTR STANKIEWICZ Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw, Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland, E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article outlines the premises and promises of a modern comeback of Stoicism, particularly the question of reinterpretation of the original doctrine, the contemporary intricacies of the principle of “following nature,” and the foundations that modern Stoicism establishes for global responsibility. Key words: Stoicism, modern Stoicism, ethics, virtue ethics, political philosophy, cosmopolitanism, responsibility. There is no doubt today that Stoicism is coming back. The ancient philosophical school established by Zeno and Chrysippus, and immortalized by Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius’ is enjoying its second youth. As Massimo Pigliucci puts it: The 21st century is seeing yet another revival of virtue ethics in general and of Stoicism in particular. [...] When it comes more specifically to Stoicism, new scholarly works and translations of classics, as well as biographies of prominent Stoics, keep appearing at a sustained rate. [...] In parallel with the above, Stoicism is, in some sense, returning to its roots as practical philosophy, as the ancient Stoics very clearly meant their system to be primarily of guidance for everyday life, not a theoretical exercise.(Pigliucci, Stoicism) Stankiewicz/Studies in Global Ethics and Global Education/ no 8/2017, pp. 54-62 Just as Pigliucci underscores, what is remarkable about the present boom of interest in Stoicism is that it is not confined to the academia.
    [Show full text]
  • Skepticism and Pluralism Ways of Living a Life Of
    SKEPTICISM AND PLURALISM WAYS OF LIVING A LIFE OF AWARENESS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZHUANGZI #±r A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN PHILOSOPHY AUGUST 2004 By John Trowbridge Dissertation Committee: Roger T. Ames, Chairperson Tamara Albertini Chung-ying Cheng James E. Tiles David R. McCraw © Copyright 2004 by John Trowbridge iii Dedicated to my wife, Jill iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In completing this research, I would like to express my appreciation first and foremost to my wife, Jill, and our three children, James, Holly, and Henry for their support during this process. I would also like to express my gratitude to my entire dissertation committee for their insight and understanding ofthe topics at hand. Studying under Roger Ames has been a transformative experience. In particular, his commitment to taking the Chinese tradition on its own terms and avoiding the tendency among Western interpreters to overwrite traditional Chinese thought with the preoccupations ofWestern philosophy has enabled me to broaden my conception ofphilosophy itself. Roger's seminars on Confucianism and Daoism, and especially a seminar on writing a philosophical translation ofthe Zhongyong r:pJm (Achieving Equilibrium in the Everyday), have greatly influenced my own initial attempts to translate and interpret the seminal philosophical texts ofancient China. Tamara Albertini's expertise in ancient Greek philosophy was indispensable to this project, and a seminar I audited with her, comparing early Greek and ancient Chinese philosophy, was part ofthe inspiration for my choice ofresearch topic. I particularly valued the opportunity to study Daoism and the Yijing ~*~ with Chung-ying Cheng g\Gr:p~ and benefited greatly from his theory ofonto-cosmology as a means of understanding classical Chinese philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Logic and Reality: a Stoic Perspective (Spring 2013)
    Language Logic and Reality: A Stoic Perspective Aaron Tuor History of Lingustics WWU Spring 2013 1 Language, Logic, and Reality: A Stoic perspective Contents 1 Introduction: The Tripartite Division of Stoic Philosophy.............................3 2 Stoic Physics...................................................................................................4 3 Stoic Dialectic.................................................................................................4 3.1 A Stoic Theory of Mind: Logos and presentations..........................4 3.2 Stoic Philosophy of Language: Lekta versus linguistic forms.........6 3.3 Stoic Logic.......................................................................................7 3.3.1 Simple and Complex Axiomata........................................7 3.3.2 Truth Conditions and Sentence Connectives....................8 3.3.3 Inference Schemata and Truths of Logic..........................9 3.4 Stoic Theory of Knowledge.............................................................10 3.4.1 Truth..................................................................................10 3.4.2 Knowledge........................................................................11 4 Conclusion: Analysis of an eristic argument..................................................12 4.1 Hermogenes as the Measure of "Man is the measure."...................13 Appendix I: Truth Tables and Inference Schemata...........................................17 Appendix II: Diagram of Communication.........................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Stoic Enlightenments
    Copyright © 2011 Margaret Felice Wald All rights reserved STOIC ENLIGHTENMENTS By MARGARET FELICE WALD A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in English written under the direction of Michael McKeon and approved by ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey October 2011 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Stoic Enlightenments By MARGARET FELICE WALD Dissertation Director: Michael McKeon Stoic ideals infused seventeenth- and eighteenth-century thought, not only in the figure of the ascetic sage who grins and bears all, but also in a myriad of other constructions, shaping the way the period imagined ethical, political, linguistic, epistemological, and social reform. My dissertation examines the literary manifestation of Stoicism’s legacy, in particular regarding the institution and danger of autonomy, the foundation and limitation of virtue, the nature of the passions, the difference between good and evil, and the referentiality of language. Alongside the standard satirical responses to the ancient creed’s rigor and rationalism, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century poetry, drama, and prose developed Stoic formulations that made the most demanding of philosophical ideals tenable within the framework of common experience. Instead of serving as hallmarks for hypocrisy, the literary stoics I investigate uphold a brand of stoicism fit for the post-regicidal, post- Protestant Reformation, post-scientific revolutionary world. My project reveals how writers used Stoicism to determine the viability of philosophical precept and establish ways of compensating for human fallibility. The ambivalent status of the Stoic sage, staged and restaged in countless texts, exemplified the period’s anxiety about measuring up to its ideals, its efforts to discover the plenitude of ii natural laws and to live by them.
    [Show full text]
  • Marcus Aurelius Was a Roman Emperor From
    Marcus Aurelius Roman Emperor and Philosopher Marcus Aurelius was a Roman Emperor from 161-180 A.D, at a time when to be a Roman Emperor really meant being an emperor of almost all of the known world, for Rome’s territory then was at its most expansive. Therefore his job was not a small one. And yet at the same time as ruling the empire, and campaigning against troublesome tribes in what is now central and middle Europe (do you remember him from the start of the Gilm Gladiator?), he was also a philosopher. This did not mean that he just sat around thinking lofty thoughts in his spare time. Rather, the philosophy he chose to study was aimed at helping the individual to live life better, that is with values and a focussed mind. Marcus never wanted any glory – his own writings tell us that the last thing he desired was to be ‘treated like a Caesar’. All he wanted was to perform his duty admirably to his own people, family and, indeed, to himself. It was his favourite philosophy as a way of life, Stoicism, which enabled him to do this. Stoicism was a philosophy practised across the Ancient World for around half a millennium since its foundation by Zeno in the 4th century B.C. Nowadays, of course, we still have the word ‘stoic’ in our own language. It tends to mean someone who ‘ just gets on with things’ and who is rather ‘inGlexible, rigid and even emotionless.’ But, as history obscures so many things from the past, this could not be further from the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Epictetus Slave and Philosopher
    Epictetus Slave and Philosopher Epictetus was born in modern-day Turkey in 55 A.D. He was born a slave (in fact, his name literally means the ‘one who is owned by another’) and lived in Rome, serving in a wealthy household to Epaphroditus who was the tyrannical Nero’s secretary. Not only was Epictetus a slave, but he was also a cripple. Life must have been difHicult and it was perhaps for this reason that he started to study philosophy and, like Marcus Aurelius, his preferred philosophy was Stoicism. It was in this philosophy that Epictetus found ‘freedom’. Not the kind of freedom one gets from being recognized as no longer being a slave, but the kind of ‘freedom’ which comes from have a purposeful and calm mind. As he studied more and more philosophy, he became the student of a leading Stoic teacher in Rome at that time, called Musonius Rufus. And, before long, Epictetus was teaching Stoicism himself, a fact which greatly annoyed the paranoid and deranged emperor Domitian who, in 93 A.D., banished all philosophers from Rome in case they ever discussed any ideas against his authoritarian rule. Epictetus decided to spend his exile in a town called Nicopolis which is in modern-day Albania, and he certainly kept active, founding his own philosophical school there. This was a place where anyone could come and seek advice about what was troubling him or her in life. Many of Epictetus’ teachings were written down, word for word, by one of his pupils and these are called the Discourses.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucan's Natural Questions: Landscape and Geography in the Bellum Civile Laura Zientek a Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulf
    Lucan’s Natural Questions: Landscape and Geography in the Bellum Civile Laura Zientek A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2014 Reading Committee: Catherine Connors, Chair Alain Gowing Stephen Hinds Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics © Copyright 2014 Laura Zientek University of Washington Abstract Lucan’s Natural Questions: Landscape and Geography in the Bellum Civile Laura Zientek Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Catherine Connors Department of Classics This dissertation is an analysis of the role of landscape and the natural world in Lucan’s Bellum Civile. I investigate digressions and excurses on mountains, rivers, and certain myths associated aetiologically with the land, and demonstrate how Stoic physics and cosmology – in particular the concepts of cosmic (dis)order, collapse, and conflagration – play a role in the way Lucan writes about the landscape in the context of a civil war poem. Building on previous analyses of the Bellum Civile that provide background on its literary context (Ahl, 1976), on Lucan’s poetic technique (Masters, 1992), and on landscape in Roman literature (Spencer, 2010), I approach Lucan’s depiction of the natural world by focusing on the mutual effect of humanity and landscape on each other. Thus, hardships posed by the land against characters like Caesar and Cato, gloomy and threatening atmospheres, and dangerous or unusual weather phenomena all have places in my study. I also explore how Lucan’s landscapes engage with the tropes of the locus amoenus or horridus (Schiesaro, 2006) and elements of the sublime (Day, 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Prosochē: Illuminating the Path of the Prokoptōn
    Prosochē: Illuminating the Path of the Prokoptōn by Christopher Fisher Prosochē (προσοχή) [pro-soh-KHAY]—the attitude and practice of attention—is the fundamental Stoic spiritual attitude.1 It is a state of continuous, vigilant, and unrelenting attentiveness to oneself—the present impressions, present desires, and present actions which shape one's moral character (prohairesis).2 When you relax your attention for a while, do not fancy you will recover it whenever you please; but remember this, that because of your fault of today your affairs must necessarily be in a worse condition in future occasions. (Discourses 4.12.1) In this brief essay I will attempt to explain the meaning of prosochē, why it is a necessary element of Stoicism practiced as a way of life, and what benefits one can expect from consistent, vigilant attention to their assents, desires, and actions. Additionally, I will point to some specific exercises or practices to help the prokoptōn (one who is making progress)3 develop and deepen the attitude and practice of prosochē. Prosochē is essential for the prokoptōn to practice the three Stoic disciplines4 prescribed by Epictetus (Discourse 3.2.1-5). Constant attention is necessary to live according to Nature. Once one embarks on the path of the prokoptōn, the attitude of prosochē serves as an ever-present, vigilant watchman to ensure one continues to make forward progress. As Epictetus warns, relaxing our attention (prosochē) is not only dangerous because of the faults which may be committed in the present, but “because of your fault today your affairs must be necessarily in a worse condition on future occasions” (Discourses 4.12.1).
    [Show full text]
  • Geschichte Der Philosophie Band I: Altertum Und Mittelalter
    Johannes Hirschberger Geschichte der Philosophie Band I: Altertum und Mittelalter Vorwort zur 1. Auflage Was den Verfasser veranlaßte, die vorliegende Phi- losophiegeschichte zu schreiben, war der oft ausge- sprochene Wunsch seiner Hörer nach einem Buch, das nicht zu umfangreich, um bewältigt werden zu können, doch auch wieder nicht zu klein wäre, um noch als Handreichung für das Studium der Geschich- te der Philosophie und insbesondere als Hilfsbuch für akademische Vorlesungen dienen zu können. Das war der äußere Anlaß. Der innere war gegeben mit der Er- kenntnis, daß für die Philosophiegeschichte etwas getan werden müsse. Auf diesem Gebiet sind seit eini- ger Zeit die Dinge etwas aus den Fugen geraten. Die Situation ist da heute so, daß philosophiegeschichtli- che Themen in einer Weise behandelt werden, die ent- weder viel Literargeschichte und wenig Philosophie oder viel Philosophie und wenig Geschichte bietet. Beide Methoden haben ihre Verdienste, aber beide sind einseitig. Darum wurde hier der Versuch unter- nommen, das Werden des philosophischen Gedankens in historischer Treue sichtbar werden zu lassen um dieses philosophischen Gedankens selbst willen. Diese Philosophiegeschichte möchte nicht bloß refe- rieren, sondern philosophieren, doch nicht so, daß Phantasien über ein Thema vorgetragen werden, sondern so, daß Rankes Forderung an die historische Wissenschaft auch hier erfüllt wird: zu zeigen, was war und wie es war. Die gesamte Philosophiegeschichte des Abendlan- des auf beschränktem Raum zu entwickeln bereitet keine geringen Schwierigkeiten. Das größere Kopf- zerbrechen macht eigentlich nicht, was man schrei- ben, sondern was man auslassen muß. Ich verstehe es, wenn man bald dies, bald das vermissen wird. Ich vermisse selber vieles. Für positive Kritik bin ich darum dankbar, nur möchte ich wünschen, daß mir nicht bloß wieder in Erinnerung gerufen wird, was ich ohnehin mit Selbstüberwindung habe verabschieden müssen.
    [Show full text]
  • Desire and Impulse in Epictetus and the Older Stoics1
    Desire and impulse in Epictetus and the Older Stoics1 1. Introduction This paper challenges a supposition that has guided several recent, agenda-setting interpretations of Stoic moral psychology. It is that Epictetus uses the terms orexis and hormê in a way that differs widely from their use by the older Stoics. A preliminary aim of the paper is to explain how this assumption came about and show that it is mistaken. The main aim is to show that, once this assumption is abandoned, some of the central elements of Stoic moral psychology can be seen to fit together in a way that has not yet been appreciated, and which provides a more coherent and plausible account of motivation than the currently standard interpretation ascribes to the Stoics. I will argue that for the Stoics intentional action is in each instance the product of two kinds of cognition: a value ascription that attributes goodness or badness to some object, conceiving of its possession as beneficial or harmful to the agent, and a judgment that a specific action is appropriate in view of this value ascription. Orexis is the Stoic term for the value ascriptions and dispositional beliefs about goodness that supply the motivational backing for specific actions. Hormê—in one of its senses—is the Stoic term for the narrowly motivating judgment about what is appropriate in light of these beliefs. A hormê, we might say, is orexis issuing in action. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to ekklisis and aphormê.2 1 For discussion of this paper and related material, I am grateful to audiences at Cornell University, Northwestern University, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Oxford University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of St Andrews, the University of Toronto, and the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.
    [Show full text]
  • Stoicism a School of Thought That Flourished in Greek and Roman
    Stoicism A school of thought that flourished in Greek and Roman antiquity. It was one of the loftiest and most sublime philosophies in the record of Western civilization. In urging participation in the affairs of man, Stoics have always believed that the goal of all inquiry is to provide man with a mode of conduct characterized by tranquillity of mind and certainty of moral worth. Nature and scope of Stoicism For the early Stoic philosopher, as for all the post-Aristotelian schools, knowledge and its pursuit are no longer held to be ends in themselves. The Hellenistic Age was a time of transition, and the Stoic philosopher was perhaps its most influential spokesman. A new culture was in the making. The heritage of an earlier period, with Athens as its intellectual leader, was to continue, but to undergo many changes. If, as with Socrates, to know is to know oneself, rationality as the sole means by which something outside of the self might be achieved may be said to be the hallmark of Stoic belief. As a Hellenistic philosophy, Stoicism presented an ars vitae, a way of accommodation for people to whom the human condition no longer appeared as the mirror of a universal, calm, and ordered existence. Reason alone could reveal the constancy of cosmic order and the originative source of unyielding value; thus, reason became the true model for human existence. To the Stoic, virtue is an inherent feature of the world, no less inexorable in relation to man than are the laws of nature. The Stoics believed that perception is the basis of true knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • The Combinatorics of Stoic Conjunction: Hipparchus Refuted, Chrysippus Vindicated
    Created on 10 January 2011 at 16.23 hours THECOMBINATORICSOFSTOIC CONJUNCTION:HIPPARCHUS REFUTED,CHRYSIPPUSVINDICATED SUSANNEBOBZIEN Dieser Aufsatz ist dem Andenken von Michael Frede gewid- met — einem wahren Philosophen und wahren Freund. Ohne sein grundlegendes Werk über die stoische Logik und ihre Entwicklung in der Antike wäre dieser Aufsatz nicht möglich. Introduction [Chrysippus] says that the number of conjunctions [constructible] from ten assertibles exceeds one million . Yet many mathematicians have refuted Chrysippus; among them is Hipparchus, who has demonstrated that his error in the calculation is huge, since the affirmative produces , con- joined assertibles, and the negative ,. (Plut. Stoic. repugn. –) Chrysippus says that the number of conjunctions [constructible] from only ten assertibles exceeds one million. However, Hipparchus refuted this, demonstrating that the affirmative encompasses , conjoined assert- ibles and the negative ,. (Plut. Quaest. conv. – ) Chrysippus, third head of the Stoa and one of the two greatest lo- gicians in antiquity, made his statement about the number of con- junctions in the third century . Hipparchus, famous astronomer and writer of a work in which he discussed combinatorics, flour- ished in the second half of the second century . The claims of © Susanne Bobzien This paper has profited greatly from detailed written comments by Fabio Acerbi and István Bodnár. An early version was presented at the Seminar ‘Hellenistic Science and Scholarship’ at the Radcliffe Institute, Harvard, in May , and I am grateful to the participants for their helpful remarks, in particular to Alexander Jones and the late Ian Mueller. Thanks go also to my brother Matthias Bobzien for first bringing the tree-structure method to my attention.
    [Show full text]