Excellence as a pedagogical value of physical education

Excellence is a core value of sport and an Olympic ideal that permeates all human activities and all societies since antiquity. The pursuit of excellence characterized the culture of ancient Greek sports, particularly the Olympic Games and the other Panhellenic Games, Pythia, Isthmia and Nemea. The meaning and importance of excellence is described in the oldest surviving texts, such as in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey (Grimes, 2005; MacIntyre, 2007). However, the most elaborated description of excellence in ancient times is found in Aristotle’s philosophy.

Trying to understand the meaning of excellence in ancient Greek philosophy would have little value if it did not contribute significantly to those that we already espouse to pursue human excellence and sport excellence today. The meaning of excellence in ancient Greece was strikingly different than that in contemporary societies which have been influenced by Western deontological and utilitarian philosophies. Alongside philosophers like Anscombe (1958) and MacIntyre (2007), it is argued here that contemporary human affairs, including sport and pedagogy, would benefit a lot from a reintroduction of the Aristotelian notion of excellence.

In the following part of this chapter, it is explained how excellence was defined in ancient Greece and particularly in Aristotle’s philosophy, why it was different than current notions of excellence and why and how we can benefit from the reintroduction of some ancient ideas in our modern efforts to achieve excellence and human good in sport and human affairs. As it happened in ancient Greece, physical education and sport are not separated and the implications refer to both contexts.

Excellence in ancient Greece: Aristos and arête

To understand the culture of excellence in ancient Greek Sport it is important to start with the etymology of the Greek word aristos (excellent). The word aristos consists of two parts, ar+istos. Looking at various lexicons of Greek language (e.g., Liddell & Scott, 1940) one can find the following. The first part ar- is found in a family of words which comes from the very old Greek verb ararisko which implies “join”, “connect”, “fit together”. This word family also includes the words armos (joint), arthron (article) and arithmos (number, amount) (ancient Greek numbers were a combination of letters). In the same word family are also the words arête which means “excellence of any kind” and the verb arêtao (to thrive, prosper) and the noun armonia (harmony; music; means of joining, fastening). The last part of the word -istos is an ending characterizing several Greek superlatives like meg-istos (biggest), kall-istos (most beautiful), tah-istos (fastest), velt-istos (best possible), etc. Hence, aristos (excellent) maybe connoting the outcome of the perfectly well connected qualities of a person. In other words, humans can become excellent when they connect perfectly all the best that they have within themselves. This includes all human qualities, physical, psychological, spiritual or moral. This explanation is supported by descriptions of excellence in several ancient texts like in Homer’s Iliad, where “physical strength, courage and intelligence are among the excellences” (MacIntyre, 2007, p. 127).

The word arête was used by ancient Greeks to imply “excellence of any kind” linked with human flourishing (e.g., Liddell & Scott, 1940). Many Western scholars have translated arête as virtue, but ancient Greeks used this word to ascribe excellent characteristics to both humans and non-humans (e.g., Homer, Aristotle, etc.). This implies that we can better understand the word arête with the concept of excellence, instead of “virtue” which applies only to humans.

In ancient Greece the outmost celebration of human excellence was taking place in Olympic Games and the other Panhellenic athletic Games. In these celebrations the concept of connectivity and “fitting together” was used to define excellence at various levels of generalization. The first level is within the person, the athlete’s excellence. Miller (2004) provides many examples indicating that athletes’ excellence combined amazing physical abilities, skills, determination and passion. In “Olympic or Isthmian or Panathenaic Games [...] the arête of men and physical beauty, amazing conditioning and great skill and irresistible force and daring and pride and unbeatable determination and indescribable passion for victory” (Solon in Lucian, Anacharsis 9–14; translated by Miller, 2004, p. 78). Winning in sport contests should also be the result of good sportspersonship (e.g., “Menelaos called out: ‘Antilochos, [...] you won’t get the prize without swearing that you played fair!’” in Homer’s Iliad, translated by Miller, p. 4).

The concepts of connection and “fitting together” are also found at higherorder levels of generalization, between-persons, between persons and cities, between persons-cities-gods. The Olympic and other Panhellenic Games were contexts of excellence facilitating the connection between Greeks, the integration of Greeks and the development of a common Greek identity. The Olympic truce was invented to stop conflicts during the Olympic Games and to facilitate communication between Greeks. Athletes’ excellence was strongly connected with the excellence of their city; the winners of the Games reflected the excellence of their cities. Finally, the excellence of athletes and cities was celebrated within the holy atmosphere of all Panhellenic Games, indicating ancient Greeks’ efforts to connect the excellence of athletes’ and cities’ with gods. The above is perfectly illustrated in the following extract from a text on a marble stele discovered at Delphi:

The Aitolians [...] announce the Soteria Games which they are establishing as a memorial to the salvation of Greece and of the victory over the barbarians who were attacking the sanctuary of Apollo which is common to all Greeks, and the Greeks themselves, [...] citizens who compete and win at the Soteria have the same honors as those written in the law for victors at the Pythia and the Nemea; that the Aitolian League be commended and crowned with a gold crown because of its arête and reverence toward the gods and valor against the barbarians” (translated by Miller, 2004, p. 153–154).

‍

To summarize, the concept of connection was inherent in the definition of human excellence in ancient Greece. This aligns well with the concept of connected Olympic rings which was envisaged by Pierre de Coubertin. The founder of modern Olympic Games connected the five rings to indicate that the Olympic Games celebrate not only individuals’ excellence but human excellence too, through the connection of people from different races and continents, which is expected to facilitate promotion of peace and human good. What is also interesting to observe in the five interconnected Olympic rings is the depiction of symmetry/harmony and not excess, which often characterizes the modern conceptualization of excellence. The concept of harmony and moderation in ancient conceptualizations of excellence is discussed below.

Excellence, the mean, choice and disposition

In contemporary world, particularly in Western societies, excellence is defined as excess. This contrasts with perspectives of excellence in ancient civilizations like the Greek and particularly in the philosophy of Aristotle. He defined excellence of any kind (arête) as:

[...] a state of mind concerned with choice, consisting of the mean relative to us, as determined by a rational principle, that is, as a “phronimos” (i.e., man of practical wisdom) would determine it. It is a mean between two vices – one stemming from excess, the other from defect – and, once again, while the vices either exceed or fall short of what is appropriate in feelings and actions, arête finds the mean and chooses it. Thus, concerning its essential quality and the definition which states what it really consists of, arête is the mean, but concerning what is best and right, it is an extreme. (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book 2 part 6; 1107a)

To understand some of the basic components of Aristotle’s definition of “excellence of any kind”, let us compare it with the definition of excellence in the West. In English dictionaries one can find the following definitions of excellence: “Extremely high quality; the state or quality of excelling or being exceptionally good; extreme merit; superiority; The quality of being outstanding or extremely good; greatness – the very best; the condition of being superior; surpassing goodness.” In these definitions, one can find only the word “extreme”, but nothing about the “mean between two vices” which was suggested by Aristotle.

I persist on the above comparison because arête is about excellence. However, trying to empathize with Western scholars who translated arête as virtue, which is a narrower conceptualization of arête, let us compare the definition of virtue in English dictionaries with Aristotle’s definition of arête. One can find the following definitions of virtue: “moral excellence; goodness; righteousness; conformity of one’s life and conduct to moral and ethical principles; uprightness; rectitude; any of the cardinal virtues (prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance) or theological virtues (faith, hope, and charity).” All these definitions describe universal moral principles that can be applied across all situations and none of them includes the concept of “choice” which is found in Aristotle’s definition.

Most interesting are the following two definitions of virtue in MerriamWebster’s Dictionary: “conformity to a standard of right; a beneficial quality or power of a thing.” The first reflects a definition stemming from duty/ deontological theories that base morality on specific principles of obligation. In other words, many people feel that they ought to follow clear obligations they have as human beings, e.g., not commit murder. The second reflects a definition stemming from consequential theories such as rule-utilitarianism, according to which a behavioral code or rule is morally right if the consequences of adopting that rule are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone.

Several philosophers criticized the overemphasis on imposed rules in deontological and utilitarian theories (e.g., Williams, 2006). To understand the practical consequences of this criticism, let us see one of the examples offered by Athanassoulis (2013). Imagine the scenario of someone who decides to visit a sick friend in a hospital although she has some other very important things to do that day. She does this because she feels obliged to do so. According to duty/deontological theories, if she is honest, she might reply to her friend’s gratefulness for the visit by saying “No worries, just doing my duty”, instead of “No worries, that’s what friends are for”. Obviously people prefer their friends to visit them because they are just friends and not because they are obliged to do so. Moreover, adolescents do not sustain friendships in order to increase overall utility, as a utilitarian theory would imply; rather they are motivated by friendship itself, which is an intrinsic motive of friendship rather than a means to an end. The problems in the previous examples are not found in Aristotle’s definition of arête, because one’s decision to visit her sick friend would be a rational choice after thinking how wise it is to make the visit at the particular time, for herself and for her friend. One’s decision is found in the mean between two vices, the indifference to her friend and neglect of other important things that she has to do at that time. The latter approach ensures that the visitor feels harmony between motives, values, justifications and behaviours. However, disharmony between motives, values and behaviours exists for the person who makes the visit to her friend in the name of duty or for utilitarian reasons.

What is also central in Aristotle’s approach is the emphasis on the character of the phronimos (man of practical wisdom) who makes the right decision. The moral person who excels in life is characterized by wisdom and intelligence that are developed through proper education, in which sport and physical education have paramount importance. On the other hand, people’s character, wisdom and knowledge are not considered preconditions for moral excellence in duty/ deontological and utilitarian theories. In contemporary Western societies the development of excellence of any kind, wisdom and character are not the major aims of sport. Instead, sport is mainly connected with the pursuit of excess. This is in direct contrast with the cultivation of arête and the consequences of arête in ancient Greece.

Excellence and eudaimonia

In ancient Greece, sport was used as a vehicle for education, the pursuit of arête which leads to human flourishing (eudaimonia). The Academy of Plato is often described as primarily a place for the education of the body, while Gymnasia were important places to cultivate youngsters’ soul (in Greek: psyche) through their quest for arête. Aristotle claimed, in fact, that eudaimonia (a flourishing life) “consists of arête” (Nichomachean Ethics, Book 1, Part 8; 1099a). In this regard the goals and behaviors of athletes were thought by ancient Greek educators and sophists to differentially reflect both arête and phronesis. Stories and observation of athletes were thus used to facilitate young people’s selfreflection, aiming at the cultivation of their virtues through the comprehension of complex concepts like arête, phronesis and eudaimonia.

For hundreds of years eudaimonia was translated in English as “happiness”. This was unfortunate because for such a long time people had a distorted understanding of the meaning of well-being in ancient Greece and in Aristotle’s philosophy. Fortunately, in recent conceptualizations of well-being, psychologists distinguished eudaimonia from hedonia (Ryff, 1989; Waterman, Schwartz, Zamboanga, et al., 2010). Hedonia is used to describe the experiences of pleasure irrespective of the sources from which that pleasure is derived. On the other hand, experiences of eudaimonia are used to refer to “feelings of personal expressiveness when acting in ways perceived to involve the development of one’s best potentials and the use of these potentials in pursuit of one’s purpose in living” (Waterman, et al., 2010). Still, there are problems even with this depiction of eudaimonia. While this definition captures the dimension of eudaimonia which Aristotle described “an extreme with regard to what is best and right”, it neglects Aristotle’s definition of eudaimonia based on arête, which aims at finding and choosing a mean between excess and defect. In its present conceptualization and measurement (e.g., Waterman, et al., 2010) eudaimonia is defined within the limits of Western individualistic culture and does not integrate personal good with the good of the larger society and the world. This is entirely contrary to Aristotle who viewed the use of one’s best potential in pursuit of the human good (Fowers, 2012).

The recent development of Positive Psychology emphasized the role of character and virtues and their contribution to well-being. Although Western psychologists claim that their recent measures of virtue take into consideration various ancient philosophies, including Aristotle’s framework (e.g., Peterson & Seligman, 2004), they still measure responses to predetermined items which are expressed as moral absolutes, a method that reflects the tradition of deontology rather than the tradition of virtue ethics (Schwartz & Sharpe, 2006). For Aristotle, virtue is inferred by the exhibition of rational thought in a particular situation by a character that consistently exhibits arête and practical wisdom (phronimos). For example, while courage is considered a virtue in general, it might be wicked to a fireman (and his family etc.), if he enters into a house in flames to save someone when the house is about to collapse. A phronimos fireman needs to exercise wisdom to find the mean between cowardice and recklessness. Even the excesses and defects for the same virtue vary according to situation. Cowardice and recklessness are irrelevant criteria to a phronimos individual who might consider that a courageous spy to his country might be wicked to other countries. In this case the mean should be found between the good of one’s own country and the good of other countries. For Aristotle, a behavior should be judged as virtuous if it is wisely chosen, based on a rational principle within a teleological perspective that takes into consideration whether a behaviour is in line with one’s aim to promote their own eudaimonia and accomplish human good. However, existing virtues’ scales fail to function within Aristotle’s teleological framework.

Contemporary theories and research influenced by Aristotle

Despite the challenges in the conceptualization and measurement of arête and eudaimonia, contemporary psychologists are working to overcome these problems (e.g., Fowers, 2014) and to adjust their theories in line with Aristotle’s philosophy. Contemporary theorists of human motivation and well-being, such as the theorists of the very polular Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000) have been influenced by Aristotle. In a recent Position Stand, the International Society of Sport Psychology (ISSP) provided an overview about how sports and physical activity can promote social missions, such as facilitating cultural exchange, social justice, sport for health and well-being, sport for positive youth development and sport for peace (Schinke, Stambulova, Lidor, Papaioannou, & Ryba, 2015). Undoubtedly, this kind of approaches focuses on the connection of human excellences that can be developed through sport. However, these approaches are affected by the dominant culture, emphasizing only the excess of excellence. Below are suggestions on how to apply the “mean between vices” notion in the pursuit of human excellence through sport.

Applying Aristotle’s principle of mean between vices in sport

The following recommendations stem from Aristotle’s suggestion to “choose the mean relative to us [...] the mean between two vices – one stemming from excess, the other from defect”. Hence, in every situation we have always to investigate where we stand in relation to ourselves or to others. Based on this understanding we have to find the mean that will help us integrate harmoniously either different qualities of ourselves or different interests between us and others. In trying to make the right choice, our goal should be to achieve harmony and flourishing for all.

In line with the general culture in ancient Greece, Aristotle considered the untrained body to be a vice. Yet, at the same time he also considered it a vice to place excessive emphasis on the development of a beautiful body and maximum strength without considering the effects of this training on other aspects of the development of the person and society. This is in contrast to modern culture, which often exaggerates the beautiful body and the perception that sport and exercise should be aimed toward the attainment of an attractive body. A culture that emphasizes a body image that reflects overall health and not just beauty and strength has important connotations for coaching and training practices in sport and exercise settings that might lead to adaptive motivational outcomes and promote health, well-being and adaptive social relationships. Research shows that an emphasis on beauty leads to maladaptive internalization of reasons for sport and exercise, discontinuity in physical activity settings and to clinical symptoms like eating disorders and mental disorders (Verstuyf, Patrick, Vansteenkiste & Teixeira, 2012). On the other hand, the pursuit of overall health facilitates intrinsic motivation and long-term participation in physical activity and psychological health.

Sport is everything about an individual’s excellence. Aristotle defined excellence of any kind (arête) as a purposeful effort to find the mean in relation to us, which is in direct contrast to contemporary unidimensional definitions of excellence which sustain unconnected the many qualities of the person and let the excesses become vices. To achieve excellence in one context, one needs to maximize and connect physical and mental excellence harmoniously. However, demonstrating excellence in just one context is not enough to improve wellbeing. Unfortunately, modern definitions of excellence and practices to develop excellence are mostly centered in one context, for example either in sport or school. Ironically, an overemphasis on achievement and excellence in sport without concurrent development of the whole person undermines the development of athletic excellence at all stages of athletes’ careers; it is damaging in: (1) early sport careers and talent development in sport because this stage requires development of multiple skills and competences (Cote, Hancock & Abernethy, 2013), (2) elite career development because athletes are ill-equipped to harmonize their sport careers and life and to cope effectively with the increased stressors at this demanding stage of their life (Stambulova & Wylleman, 2013), and (3) career termination and effective transition from sport to other job sectors, which requires multiple competences from former athletes (Stambulova & Wylleman, 2013). For Aristotle, excellence is found between the vices of deceiving others and low effort. By not trying hard, athletes deceive themselves. Coaches emphasizing this approach are more likely to have athletes who understand that the development of excellence requires maximum effort and not deception. Although this sounds like a truism, people often believe that excellence is facilitated when someone exhibits success with any means, because this provides important external resources to assist an athlete in the pursuit of excellence. Famous cases of doping in sport are likely to add to this confusion, undermining the value of moral behaviour in sport and maybe in any context involving pursuit of excellence. Moral behavior in sport can be achieved if it is entirely self-determined and connected with athletes’ pursuit of eudaimonia (Sage & Kavussanu, 2010). Self-determined moral behavior is the result of rational thought and choice that are inextricably linked with one’s pursuit of eudaimonia.

Sport is supposed to be an ideal setting to develop social skills and teach teamwork, but cooperation is ephemeral if it is imposed by rules and not selfinitiated by athletes. For Aristotle arête is about finding and selecting the mean between one’s interests and the interests of others. This has important benefits for both the person and the others or the team. Integrating one’s perspective with that of others’ to resolve interpersonal conflict (Rahim, 2002) has a positive impact on psychological well-being (Knee, Lonsbary, Canevello, & Patrick, 2005). Any other approach to manage conflict, like obliging, dominating and avoiding conflict styles (Rahim, 2002), does not fall in the mean between personal and others’ interests and is unlikely to promote the well-being of all parties.

Social justice should be searched in the mean between absolute equality and absolute inequality; between equal distributions of rewards irrespective of one’s effort and performance, on the one hand, and the winner who takes everything on the other. Humans and societies should show understanding and support to individuals and groups who cannot be the best or even cannot perform up to expected standards, which are often linked to average performance, because there will be always 50% of the people performing below average (underperformance) for different reasons. If we want a harmonious society, everyone should have place in it and should have the required means to leave a decent life. On the other hand, there is common belief that those who achieve maximum performance should be acknowledged for it. Youth sport and physical education are settings where the distribution of rewards does not create the biggest problems. Issues of equality and inequality usually rise in connection with children’s inclusion or exclusion in games and competitions. To promote equality of opportunities and inclusion in sport and PE, campaigns and educational programs should target sport leaders, PE teachers and coaches, parents, media and sport journalists, training them how to create inclusive environments for all children.

Sport is assumed to promote peace, but still wars and rivalry between teams is the reality. Despite the examples of good sportsmanship, one can hardly find any contemporary theory that directs coaches and athletes to integrate the interests of their teams with the interests of competitor teams. Yet, as Hurtshouse (2007) suggests, if we apply Aristotle’s philosophy today, we should primarily think about challenges for humans in the globalization era and how to develop a global culture that would favor policies promoting sustainable development ensuring a sustainable physical and human environment. The generations of the 21st century need education that will enable them to find and select the mean between the interests of their companies or countries and the interests of others’ companies or countries. Today we urgently need policies that integrate the flourishing of human civilization and the flourishing of the physical environment. Arête can be taught in sport and physical education by coaches and teachers with practical wisdom (phronesis). Our universities, education and sport systems should prepare and promote the best individuals as leaders who will ensure the promotion of excellence of any kind as well as eudaimonia in schools, sport and society.

Conclusion

Contemporary researchers in psychology, sport and pedagogy are exploring ideals influenced by the Olympic Movement and ancient Greek philosophers. This type of research tries to increase all human excellences through sport. However, focusing only on the excess of excellence without searching thoroughly the mean between vices might not lead to sustainable effects. The application of Aristotle’s philosophy both in research and practice in sport, education and psychology is still more relevant than ever (Fowers, 2012).

‍

References

Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 1–19.

Aristotle. The Nichomachean Ethics. (Consideration of various translations, i.e., by Lipourlis, Irwin, Johnston, Ostwald, Ross).

Athanassoulis, N. (2013). Virtue Ethics. London: Bloomsbury.

Côté, J., Hancock, D. J. & Abernethy, B. (2013). Nurturing talent in youth sport. In A. Papaioannou, & D. Hackfort (ed.), Routledge Companion to Sport and Exercise Psychology: London: Routledge.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.

Fowers, B. J. (2012). An Aristotelian framework for the human good. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 32(1), 10–23.

Fowers, B. J. (2014). Toward programmatic research on virtue assessment: Challenges and prospects. Theory and Research in Education, 12(3), 309–328.

Grimes, P. (2005). Contrasting excellence in Homer with philosophical midwifery. Philosophical Practice, 1(1), 17–22.

Hursthouse, R. (2007). Environmental virtue ethics. In R. L., Walker and P. J. Ivanhoe (eds.), Working Virtue: Virtue Ethics and Contemporary Moral Problems, 155–172.

Knee, C. R., Lonsbary, C. Canevello, A. & Patrick, H. (2005). Self-determination and conflict in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 997–1009.

Liddell, H. G., & Scott, R. (1940). A Greek-English Lexicon (9th ed.). Clarendon: Oxford. http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/lsj/#eid=15328&context=lsj&action=hw-list-click

MacIntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue. University of Notre Dame Press.

Miller, S.G. (2004). Arête: Greek Sports from Ancient Sources. CA: California University Press.

Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character Strengths and Virtues. NY: Oxford University Press.

Rahim, M. A. (2002) Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 13, 206–235.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.

Ryan, R. M., Curren, R. R., & Deci, E. L. (2013). What humans need: Flourishing in Aristotelian philosophy and self-determination theory. In A. S. Waterman (ed.) The Best within Us: Positive Psychology Perspectives on Eudaimonic Functioning (57–75). Washington DC: American Psychological Association Books.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it?: Explorations of the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.

Sage, L., & Kavussanu, M. (2010). Moral identity and social goals predict eudaimonia in football. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(6), 461–466.

Schinke, R. J., Stambulova, N. R., Lidor, R., Papaioannou, A., & Ryba, T. V. (2015). ISSP position stand: Social missions through sport and exercise psychology. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1–19.

Sheldon, K. M., Cummins, R., & Kamble, S. (2010). Life balance and well-being: Testing a novel conceptual and measurement approach. Journal of Personality, 78, 1093–1113.

Stambulova, N.,& Wylleman, P. (2013). Athletes’ career development and transitions. In A. Papaioannou & D. Hackfort (eds.), Routledge Companion to Sport and Exercise Psychology: Global Perspectives and Fundamental Concepts. London: Routledge.

Verstuyf, J., Patrick, H., Vansteenkiste M., & Teixeira P. J. (2012). Motivational dynamics of eating regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 9 (1), 21. at: http://www.ijbnpa.org/content/9/1/21

Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, , R. D., Williams, M. K., Agocha, V. B., Kim, S. Y., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). The questionnaire for eudaimonic well-being: Psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 41–61.

Williams, B. (2006). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. London: Routledge.

‍

‍

 PAPAIOANNOU Athanasios G.,"Excellence as a pedagogigal value of physical education",in:K.Georgiadis (ed.), Olympic Movement: The process of renewal adaption, 55thInternational Session for Young Participants (Ancient Olympia,23/5-6/6/2015),InternationalOlympic Academy, Athens, 2016, pp.148-161.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍