Glenn W. Most

Mm-hmm.

In fact, you talk about it in, in one of your, um, one of your commentaries on the passage in the book, and it's interesting because the original Greek there, uh, ethos anthropo daimon, it's actually, if you translate it, in fact, one of the most recent translations by Glenn Most, he put it this way, that for a human being, your character is like a personal god.

So it's this very interesting way of putting the responsibility.

If you're gonna attend to your character, you're gonna have a good god ruling over you.

It's interesting that you're calling it a science.

I mean, obviously, when people use the word science in English, they're usually thinking of things like physics, biology, chemistry, right? And a- actually, back in 2015, you wrote a much-cited paper together with Glenn Most, which is called History of Science and History of Philologies.

And in this case, you drew a parallel between the concerns of early modern humanists, so the ones who were doing this philological work on some of the classical texts you just mentioned.

And so that-- them on the one hand, and on the other hand, early modern scientists, so, like, think of astronomers like Kepler or Copernicus and so on.

And so their observations and their techniques of recording observations were exactly their techniques of excerpting quotations from texts, gathering words for a thesaurus, for example, or a, a lexicon.

And they often explicitly draw the analogy between observing a text, for example, the anachronisms that we were just discussing in the exposure of forgeries, and the observation of nature.

So that goes back to the parallel that you drew together with Glenn Most.

This would be of a different practice, which is note-taking and, you know, the excising of a significant chunk, as it were, either a chunk from a text or a chunk from the flow of experience as an observation.